[Foundation-l] What's appropriate attribution?

[Ray Saintonge]

David Gerard wrote:
> 2008/10/23 Ray Saintonge:
>   
>> David Gerard wrote:
>>     
>>> The threat model we're taking about is: what does a reuser say if
>>> taken to court by an insane and obsessive author? Would a judge
>>> consider the reuser's actions reasonable, given accepted behaviour
>>> regarding said licence to date? That sort of squishy, arguable, grey
>>> area thing.
>>>       
>> There is no inoculation to prevent insanity and obsession.  Whatever
>> model is chosen can provide opportunities for the litigious.  Thus if we
>> go with the five principal authors, what's to prevent number six from
>> arguing that he should be in the top five.
>>     
> Precisely - would the reuser's behaviour and demonstrable good faith
> and actions in accordance with common practice be sufficient for the
> judge to say "haha no" and throw the case out, possibly awarding costs
> against the plaintiff? If "yes" then all is well.
That course of action presupposes that there is someone foolish enough 
to take the thing to court in the first place, and that that person has 
the resources to mount a credible case   That credible case must include 
an estimate of monetary damage.

I would love it if we could find such a fool.  That would give us a 
decision to wave under the noses of the paraniacs.

Ec