I agree, the issue of concensus is clearly of secondary importance to understanding what acutally is the case, regardless of what anybody thought in the past.

In the mean time, let me answer Larry's question briefly.

I don't think anybody could sucessfully sue, because we have a strong argument that the wikipedians page fulfills the FDL authorship requirement. But it would be the copyright holders (those who wrote content) who would have the legal standing to sue if there were in fact an actuall violation.

Because the text is licenced under the FDL, which the copyright holder has agreed to, he or she would have no standing to sue unless someone broke that contract.

Yours Mark

-----Original Message----- From: Larry Sanger To: 'wikipedia-l@nupedia.com' Sent: 2/6/02 6:35 PM Subject: RE: [Wikipedia-l] Copyrights

I don't see that there has been the consensus you mention. Frankly, I don't care if there has been, because I'm not arguing with you, I'm asking for clarification, for pete's sake! Sheesh!

OK, let me put my confusion a different way, because I still don't understand:

WHO has the right to sue, and FOR WHAT do they have that right?

Larry

[Wikipedia-l] To manage your subscription to this list, please go here: http://www.nupedia.com/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l