Toby Bartels wrote:
This seems to me like a reasonable argument that the NYTimes could make to allow themselves to use mav's photo on their front page. They'd have to argue that the front page is a *compilation*. And if they really did include with mav's photo everything that they'd need for the GFDL to apply when it's alone (text of the licence, link to a source that hasn't been smudged, etc), then I'd be inclined to let them get away with it.
I think that's exactly right. They would be in compliance with the GNU FDL.