[Foundation-l] RfC: License update proposal

David Gerard dgerard at gmail.com
Thu Jan 22 15:42:14 UTC 2009

2009/1/22 Andrew Whitworth <wknight8111 at gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 9:58 AM, Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org> wrote:

>> As Thomas said, it requires Internet access, which might not be available.
>> I think it's a bit more than that, though.  The credit should be part of the
>> work itself, not external to the work.  When you're talking about a website,
>> it's hard to define where the work begins and where it ends, clearly a work
>> can span multiple URLs, and it's essentially meaningless whether or not
>> those URLs have different domain names (at least assuming they are both kept
>> nearly 100% reliable).  None of these three things are true with books,
>> T-shirts, or movies (for a movie a URL would be especially obnoxious).

> As a contributor to these 'ere projects myself, I personally would
> prefer the less reliable but more informative URL for attribution
> myself. That's a personal preference only, and I don't see any need to
> push that on others.

Use my stuff, that's why I write it! I dual-licensed all my article
space text and pictures as CC-by-sa any a while ago anyway. More
people should do this IMO.

- d.

More information about the foundation-l mailing list