On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 4:30 PM, geni <[email protected]> wrote: > 2009/2/3 Chad <[email protected]>: > > We talk a lot on this list about what level of attribution is "enough." > > Is a link to Wikipedia enough? > > no > > > A link to the article? > > No > > > A list of top > > authors? > > No > > > A link to the full history? > > If the full history is on your website then it depends on what you are > doing. > > >Include the full history? > > Yes but overkill. > > >There's > > a lot of varying opinions on this list, and its very easy to see that > > any sort of compromise is going to be difficult. On some aspects > > of this, everyone is going to have to make concessions. > > I'm arguing from a position of what the law says. The law does not > have to make concessions. > > > > The one question that remains in my mind is: how many people > > share your views? Some people are very adamant about full > > attribution. Do you know how many people support your position > > (and I'm not talking about on this list)? > > At the moment whoever wrote the current CC license and you can look up > the voting records for the most recent lot of copyright law through > congress. > > This isn't something you can get around. > > > This is the only point I wanted to reply to out of Erik's e-mail. To be > > perfectly honest, I would be fascinated by the results of the survey. > > The law is not subject to a wikimedia survey. > > > > I only think a poll of the community could settle the issue. Is > > there any point in requiring full attribution if only 0.001% of the > > community desires it? > > Yes it is unlawful to do otherwise. Attribution has to meet the > requirements of "provide, reasonable to the medium or means You are > utilizing: (i) the name of the Original Author (or pseudonym, if > applicable)" > > Short of deleting pretty much everything and starting again you can't > get around this. > > -- > geni > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > [email protected] > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l >
I never said anything about disregarding the law. I don't give a rat's ass *how* I'm attributed, as long as I'm not forgotten for the work I've done. If there's a legal requirement for a certain method and/or degree of attribution, then obviously that takes precedence over personal preferences. You say the license says one thing. Other people say it doesn't. It's obviously a very grey area (if it was black and white, we wouldn't be having this debate). My only point was to solicit wider feedback, not have a poll to overrule legal requirements. -Chad _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
