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

Anthony wikimail at inbox.org
Mon Jan 12 00:03:16 UTC 2009

On Sun, Jan 11, 2009 at 4:46 PM, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> 2009/1/11 Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org>:
> > Granted, including full change histories is overkill
> Thanks for acknowledging this.
> The GFDL (including prior versions) deals with author names for three
> different purposes:
> * author credit on the title page;
> * author copyright in the copyright notices;
> * author names for tracking modifications in the history section.

That may have been the intention of the author of the GFDL (though you
haven't proven this).  But the simple fact of the matter is that the history
section *does* provide credit to *all* the authors.

Thus, the rest of your convoluted argument is irrelevant.

There is a legitimate
> argument that, under a literal reading of the GFDL, any re-user _also_
> has to include a full copy of the change history.

The problem with that argument is that "the change history" isn't in the
format or location that "the section entitled 'History' would be".

More information about the foundation-l mailing list