Re: [Wikipedia-l] Public Library of Science GFDL Compatible

>Wouldn't be true that the above is equivalent to creating an invariant 
>section under the GFDL, (i.e. the authors of the CC work must ALWAYS be 
>listed, even if they are not one of the five principal authors of the 
>modified work) and the original work must be cited with a credit. Ikipedia 
>does not accept invariant sections, no?

I had thought about this before, and my guess was that the
attribution would not actually be an invariant section, but just a
removable attribution.

With a content with CC-by, we can do either one of the following three,
I suppose.

1. I can take a CC-by'd content and release it with the same term.

2. I can take a CC-by'd content, create a derivative work,
and release the derivative work in CC-by.

3. I can take a CC-by'd content, create a derivative work,
and release the derivative work in GFDL or something else -
say, CC-nc (non-commercial).

When I take the third option, my main obligation is
to include attribution to my derivative work - and it is not
my obligation to make the attribution an invariant section
so that future derivative works will all contain the same
attribution (to a reasonable degree).

This may be strange to some GFDL believers - it seems
like that a commercial publisher can easily build on Creative
Commons material, and make it proprietary.

Yet going back to the original question - if we can use CC-by
contents for Wikipedia, I see some other issues.

When we mingle an existing article with the new CC-by material
and thereby create a derivative work of the CC-by content,
we have to meet the requirement at 4-b

"at a minimum such credit will appear where any other
comparable authorship credit appears and in a manner
at least as prominent as such other comparable authorship
credit. "

( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/legalcode )

This in the context of current Wikipedia means that we
list the name of the author of CC-by content at page
history section.

Or, to be very strict in following the ver 1.2 of the
GFDL, we should list the name of the CC-by authors
with other authors of the article at the beginning of the
artilce. (Immediately after the title, before the main
text starts, as defined in GFDL's 1. APPLICABILITY
AND DEFINITIONS section)

"For works in formats which do not have any title page
as such, "Title Page" means the text near the most
prominent appearance of the work's title, preceding the
beginning of the body of the text."

( 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_License 
)

So, I would feel more confident that a derivative work of
CC-by contents can be posted as a new page in
wikipedia more safely. When it comes to mingling with
the existing wikipedia article, I think there is a question of
how to display the CC-by authors' names with other
authors names.


Well, needless to say, I am not a lawyer and my knowledge
of law goes only so far - so I am more than happy to learn
different interpretations. And I'm currently involved in an
International CreativeCommons project (for Japan), and
indeed want to learn more about these matters.

cheers,

Tomos

_________________________________________________________________
Cheer a special someone with a fun Halloween eCard from American Greetings! 
Go to  http://www.msn.americangreetings.com/index_msn.pd?source=msne134