Re: One document or many, missing copyright notice

On 1 Dec 2003 at 6:31, Toby Bartels wrote:

> It seems to me that Cunc's version is equally useful to
> redistributors. What difference does it make if they redistribute all
> of our content or modify it to delete all 179999 180000ths of it?

As The Cunctator noted, the restrictions on Modified Versions (section 4) are 
stronger than those on "verbatim copies". As a simple example, if I print off a 
Wikipedia article under The Cuncator's interpretation, then I MUST write my 
name on it, as the publisher, under section 4C. Under my interpretation, this 
would be verbatim copying, and I can republish anonymously.

The Cunctator wrote:

> We have a basic problem, which is that Wikipedia is missing a copyright
> notice, which makes it impossible for redistributors to follow the
> letter of the GFDL, among other things.

Section 4D requires modifying redistributors to preserve any copyright notices 
present, but if there are no copyright notices present, then my interpretation 
would be that section 4D does not apply. I'd be interested to see how you reach 
the conclusion that we must have a copyright notice?

-Martin "IANAL" Harper