[Foundation-l] What's appropriate attribution?

Anthony wikimail at inbox.org
Tue Oct 21 11:40:36 UTC 2008


On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 11:11 PM, John at Darkstar <vacuum at jeb.no> wrote:

> I've asked about this some time back, and the answare was that Wikipedia
> is a collection of independent work, meaning each one of them has to
> list the principal authors of that work. The collection as such is a
> database and may or may not be a work in itself.
>

1) Who told you that?  2) Can the names be combined into a single list?  I
don't see why not.

Also, a failure to state the principal authors does not release any
> later work from giving due attribution. The attribution is a property of
> the work itself and not for some random copy of the work, that is each
> copy has to give due respect to the authors of the work not the authors
> of the previous copy.


Absolutely agreed.  My longstanding interpretation of the GFDL was that
attribution of all (non de-minimus) authors was required, in the section
Entitled History.  Considering moral rights laws and the ethical principles
behind them, I still believe this is the correct interpretation, and that
the phrase "as given on its Title page" should be interpreted to apply only
to "publisher of the Document".


More information about the foundation-l mailing list