[Foundation-l] GFDL Q&A update and question

Robert Rohde rarohde at gmail.com
Thu Jan 8 23:35:54 UTC 2009


On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 5:07 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> "Wikipedia" would only satisfy the license if the author specifically
> said that was ok. The FAQ says there will not be a requirement to
> designate "Wikipedia" or anything else to receive the attribution. I
> would expect the attribution requirements to be made perfectly clear
> before we vote, if they're not, I would almost certainly vote against
> the proposal.

I concur.  The WMF should clearly state what they anticipate
attribution to look like.  Whether one agrees that the WMF position is
adequate might end up being an important issue in the decision on
whether to support the vote.  However the absence of any guidance
about what is appropriate attribution strikes me as a strong reason to
be critical.

If attribution rules are going to change, I think it is important to
be as unambiguous as possible about what they are changing to, and
encourage a uniform interpretation rather than leaving it for every
user to ponder what the license expects of them.

-Robert Rohde



More information about the foundation-l mailing list