[Foundation-l] What's appropriate attribution?

[Anthony]

On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 8:38 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>wrote:

> > 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".
>
> If memory serves (it's been a while since I read the license
> properly), the "5 principal authors" thing is for re-use, the
> "preserve the section entitled history" thing is for modifications.
> The two are different uses of the license. If you're just using the
> content as is it's far easier than if you're modifying it.


Nope, they're both for modifications.  If you're just making a verbatim
copy, you preserve any attribution in the original as a natural part of not
making any modifications.  Of course, in the case of Wikipedia, the original
isn't properly attributed in the first place.