[Wikimedia-l] Licencing question

[???]

On 22/01/2013 18:28, Thomas Dalton wrote:
> On 22 January 2013 16:51, Richard Symonds
> <richard.symonds at wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
>> It appears that opinion is divided on whether a hyperlink is acceptable as
>> attribution, therefore I'm asking the experts:
>>
>>     - Does anyone have any input on this?
>>     - Has this discussion been had before, if so, where?
>>     - Should Wikipedia, Commons and the various Wikimedia sites use the full
>>     byline, or are we OK just using a hyperlink?
>
> If we need to have bylines for images, surely we need them for text as well?
>
> It's been discussed hundreds of times before, as you can imagine. I'm
> not aware of any particular conclusions being reached, other than
> no-one caring enough to get the status quo changed.
>
> The issue of us taking freely licenced content from other sources is
> potentially more of an issue. When you submit something, you agree to
> be attributed through a link to the Wikipedia article, but when you
> import something the author has made no such agreement.
>

Commons may have related issues where they clone out a copyright 
watermark. If nothing else it is likely to aggravate the content creator 
and in the case of one German archive resulted in them saying that after 
donating 80,000 images they weren't donating any more images to Commons 
because of it.