[Foundation-l] Licensing interim update

[Brian]

Where can I read about what, exactly, the spirit of the GFDL is?
I've already explained why flexible attribution is equivalent to full
attribution in a recent post. It's easy to do the reverse lookup from a
piece of content to its authors. Anyone wanting to know who the content
should be attributed can easily find that out. We can develop tools to make
it easier.

But back to your spirit argument. Why would a CC-Wiki that is more practical
about attribution be against the spirit of the GFDL?

On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>wrote:

> 2009/2/3 Brian <Brian.Mingus at colorado.edu>:
> > I would like to see the most flexible attribution rules possible (just
> the
> > Article Title, Wikipedia perhaps). If Geni's adamance regarding strict
> terms
> > of attribution is a correct interpretation of the CC-BY-SA then I can't
> see
> > it as being the correct license for the projects. Where is the CC-Wiki
> > license? We have tremendous goodwill with both the FSF and CC, surely we
> can
> > get our own license that applies specifically to the problems that wikis
> > face and other content mediums do not.
>
> We can't relicense GFDL works under a license which isn't in the same
> spirit, a license which allowed attribution to "Wikipedia" without the
> explicit consent of the author wouldn't be in the same spirit.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>