[Foundation-l] Proposed revised attribution language

Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonavaro at gmail.com
Sat Mar 14 09:49:47 UTC 2009

Erik Moeller wrote:
> Here's a first crack at revised attribution language. When the
> language is completely finalized, I'll send a separate note explaining
> some of our reasoning for this general approach in more detail. In the
> meantime, I'd appreciate it if you could point out any bugs in this
> specific language, given its intent which should be self-evident. To
> keep the discussion focused, please read it from the perspective of a
> "from scratch" attribution model, i.e., imagine that a new
> encyclopedia wiki that you'd contribute to had these terms. Which
> problems would they cause? Are there specific third party uses that
> would be significantly hampered by these terms?
BTW, the most (not only specific but even general) significant
third party use hampered by the general scheme of your
whole conception of that "from scratch" approach, is that
it is simply false. Sorry. Somebody had to say that.

We are not starting fresh. We have way too much baggage
for that to work.

Language will not bind contributors who understand they
are protected by the copyleft provisions of both GFDL and
CC-BY-SA. That just will not happen.

In the real world much of the terms of use will be just so
much arm-waving, let us be realistic.


Jussi-Ville Heiskanen

P.S. Anyone going to catch the 19.3. speech by Lawrence
Lessig at the San Francisco "Legally Speaking" event?
Only costs 50 bucks for entrance.

More information about the foundation-l mailing list