On Sunday, 29 April 2012 at 13:08, Harry Burt wrote:
On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Charles
Matthews
<charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com (mailto:charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com)>
wrote:
<snip>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_contact_role_accounts
does say it is a copyright matter; but the page linked to doesn't seem
to spell that out. Perhaps it should.
Charles
As I understand it, there used to be a general concern that the only
way the GFDL could be held to be compatible with pseudonymity was if
there was a 1-to-1 mapping between pseudonyms and human beings.
I'm not sure that was ever actually looked into, since it seems to me
that many-to-many would be just as good, as long as you realised and
confirmed you were asking to be attributed with a vague identifier
(like 99% of humanity does when it picks a name someone else already
has or had).
Given trademark law, I'd say a corporate name like "Disney Inc." is
significantly more rigid than a personal name like "John Smith". People
don't tend to sue you if you call yourself John Smith quite so much as they
do over using the names of multinational conglomerates...
--
Tom Morris
<http://tommorris.org/>
Except that the line between a trademark and a personal name is incredibly
fine: think about the likes of John Lewis, Cath Kidston and W.H. Smith.
Deryck
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia UK mailing list
wikimediauk-l(a)wikimedia.org
http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
WMUK:
http://uk.wikimedia.org