[Foundation-l] Licensing transition: opposing points of view

Anthony wikimail at inbox.org
Sat Mar 21 03:24:20 UTC 2009

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> The change tracking history section has nothing to do with
> attribution, as I've noted before.

However, you're quite inconsistent on that point.  As one example among
many, you said earlier "Indeed, the only way in which contributors are
credited in Wikipedia is through a history of changes."

What is and isn't acceptable is defined through more than the license.

Like polling?  1 out of 5 Wikipedians polled expressed that they expect a
full list of authors to be listed in an offline copy.

"Attribution by link" is acceptable to most Wikipedians, but not to all.

> 4) The CC-BY-SA license grants the author the option to not supply a
> name for purposes of attribution. The CC-BY-SA license grants the
> author the option to supply a URL.

Are you claiming that Wikipedians have supplied such a URL?  What is the URL
they have supplied?  Must all reusers supply this URL, or is it optional for
them to do so?

More information about the foundation-l mailing list