Bram Moolenaar <Bram <at> Moolenaar.net> writes: [snip] > The file says: Published on Wikipedia in 2003-04 and declared authorless. > > That means there is no copyright statement and thus this file can't be > copied.
I researched more, and the file's license is indeed unclear. Tim Starling originally uploaded it to Wikipedia as a "file", not as part of a "project page", so it had no license at the time. Then, as time passed and it was edited, two people changed the license[1]. They probably changed it without permission from the others who made copyright-significant contributions: about fifteen lines or so[2]. Then it was copied to a "project page". When something is copied to a project page, then when they click "Save", the copier certifies that it was already under an open-source license. Someone has to compile a list of copyright-significant editors and contact them all for permission to relicense the file to another license. Is CC-BY-SA 3.0 Unported okay? ^ [1]. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Untagged_images/Archive_2#Non-image_files ^ [2]. http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Legally-Significant > Can the author please come forward, add a maintainer to the header, so > that we can include this in the distribution? I don't add files unless > there is a maintainer. I edited the file to add a request for a maintainer to step up. > What's this thing with anonymous writings? Are you afraid to tell your > mum you are using Vim and like it? I just emailed you my real name off-list. I want to keep my Wikipedia identity separate from my real identity. All the best, --unforgettableid -- You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. Do not top-post! Type your reply below the text you are replying to. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php
