RE: One document or many, missing copyright notice

> From: Alex R. Monday, December 01, 2003 5:41 PM


<snip GFDL text re: copyright notice for original Document>

> 
> It says to put this just after the title page, thus I would read this
as
> being a reference to the copyright notices (sec. 4.E) and the page
History > (sec. 4.I).
> Otherwise the only other interpretation is that there is no license
and
> that is absurd. Clearly the modification notice at the bottom of the
page
> functions as a copyright notice of the date and time of publication of
the > latest version, and the list of authors.

Again you're conflating the GFDL's requirements for a Modified Version
(sec. 4) with its requirements (or recommendations) for the original
Document. The 
copyright notice for the original Document is *not* the same as the
copyright notice for Modified Versions. But see below.

> 
> As I said, the Berne Convention (to which the US is a signatory) does
not
> require a copyright notice and a minor difference with the license is
not
> going to invalidate the license.

I never said it would; I wouldn't expect it to. 

The problem is that not including the copyright notice makes life more
difficult for redistributors, since the license (in sec. 4) assumes the
existence of such a copyright notice with the original Document.

As you said, we should be trying to make life simpler for people.