2009/2/3 Chad <[email protected]>: > 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.
As an author you can accept any form of credit you like. You cannot demand credit beyond what is reasonable to the medium or means. > You say the license says one thing. Other people say it doesn't. Yes. Strangely none of them are people a recognise from dealing with wikipedia's day to day copyright issues. > It's > obviously a very grey area (if it was black and white, we wouldn't be > having this debate). No it's a very B&W area (at least the bit we are arguing over). People are trying to cloud the issue. >My only point was to solicit wider feedback, not > have a poll to overrule legal requirements. Until people stop proposing stuff that isn't legal wider feedback is of only limited use. -- geni _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
