[Foundation-l] Proposed revised attribution language

[David Gerard]

2009/3/15 geni <geniice at gmail.com>:

> Wikimedia is not a party to the license therefor it's FAQ is of no
> relevance. The answer again goes to the license text. "You must...keep
> intact all copyright notices for the Work and provide ,reasonable to
> the medium or means You are utilizing: (i) the name of the Original
> Author".
> The mug maker could lose the case on the grounds that the license made
> it clear that it is the person who is doing the reuse who has to
> provide the credit and attempting to do it via third parties is not
> legitimate.
> However any guidelines the foundation uses must be as robust as
> possible otherwise rather than being a significant part of the free
> content movement wikipedia ends up as the copyright equivalent of a
> radioactive mess no sane person would touch.


Good thing we're not using an impossible-to-obey licence like the GFDL, then.


- d.