...

The current file upload utility requires the user to "donate" the copyright to "Wikipedia". Wikipedia is no legal entity, so this doesn't make sense. It is also not in line with the way we have handled copyrights up to know for text submissions: the user retains copyright, but licenses the work under GFDL. I suggest that this be changed.

What makes it true that "we have handled copyrights up to now for text submissions" in this way (i.e., with this interpretation)?

There is nothing to interpret. I have never signed over copyrights of any Wikipedia article I wrote to anybody, therefore I remain the sole copyright owner. I *licensed* my materials under GFDL. Most free software projects works that way. For instance, I own the copyright of several parts of the Linux kernel.

Nothing on the website (except the new file upload notice) suggests that contributors hand over copyrights. You are certainly free to in the future demand that copyrights be signed over to a legal entity (as the FSF for GNU software does), but then you need to * create a legal entity which will hold the copyrights * get permission of copyright holders The FSF demands a signed faxed paper to that effect from every contributor (which I have sent, and therefore I am *not* anymore t he copyright holder of the parts of emacs I wrote).

While I can certainly freely admit that there are other interpretations, what I can't understand is why you would think another interpretation is so clearly the correct one.

I am unclear about what exactly you want to interpret. Is it the submission notice we see on the edit screen? " Please notice that all contributions to Wikipedia are considered to be released under the GNU Free Documentation License. " This says that whatever I contribute, I automatically license under GFDL. Is there any way to understand this statement as saying "the copyright to everything you contribute goes to Wikipedia, which then licenses the materials under GFDL"? I very much doubt it, since the sentence doesn't even contain the word "copyright".

The distinction is not just academic: if I give up copyright, then the new copyright owner can in principle turn around and republish the material under any license they wish, or sell the copyrights to somebody else who may want to do that.

By the way, Wikipedia might soon join Nupedia as part of a Nupedia Foundation; that then would be the obvious holders of Wikipedia article copyrights.

Yes, for future contributions, if that is desired.

Axel