Re: quote & GFDL (was: Re: are images GFDL'd?)

Imran-

Perhaps I was not clear..

Like you suggested, any decent quote would be accompanied by a proper 
attribution.

But don't you think there is still a potential problem in this case because 
the author of the quoted lyric never released it under GFDL? The song lyric 
sliped in to John's GFDL'd web page as a fair use quote. But now a 
downstream user (Mary) did not care which part was GFDL and which was fair 
use, and treated the quote as if it was GFDL'd. Unlike John's web site, 
which might well be non-profit and educational or research in nature, Mary 
is now trying to make money off the lyric. This type of use, even when 
properly attributed, may or may not fall into fair use.

----

Back to the general issue regarding GFDL's compatibility with fair use - I 
can think of the following defense.

I personally do not think that it is okay to modify a GFDL'd text and defame 
a person. Even if the modification is done in compliance with GFDL, it is 
still a defamation. And GFDL does not offer any guarantee that any use of 
the text would not defame anybody. The author of the GFDL'd text does not 
place any restriction as to prevent downstream users from defaming somebody. 
But no restriction does not mean a guarantee of no legal risk for the 
downstream users.

Likewise, GFDL does not guarantee that any modification of a GFDL'd text 
would not violate anyone's copyright. If a GFDL'd text includes a quote that 
is attributed as somebody elses' than the authors of the GFDL'd text (listed 
in the history section), then it means that part is not released under GFDL. 
Again, there is no restriction from the author of the GFDL'd text as to 
prevent downstream users from violating the copyright of the author of the 
quoted text. But again, no restriction does not mean a guarantee of no legal 
risk for the downstream users.

But perhaps it would be wise to explicitly state if there is a legal risk 
for downstream users regarding individual quotes? ("This quote is used based 
on fair use, and there is no guarantee that GFDL-compliant use of this quote 
will not violate the author's copyright.")

Note this is not a restriction, but just informing others of risks. It is up 
to downstream users to take or avoid legal risks, and wikipedia contributors 
would not place any restrictions other than GFDL does.


I am not a lawyer, so I would like to hear what others think.

best,

Tomos

>From: Imran Ghory To: Tomos at Wikipedia CC: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [Wikilegal-l] quote & GFDL (was: Re: are images GFDL'd?)
>Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 00:27:01 +0000 (GMT)

>On Wed, 17 Dec 2003, Tomos at Wikipedia wrote:
>
> > 2) Mary decides to use a specific part of text, namely the quote part. 
>She
> > uses it for her song, poem, and T-shirt. But this text is not presented 
>as
> > quote in those pieces, just presented as a piece of GFDL'd text. History 
>is
> > kept - so that it is clear that the author of the web page is John; the 
>URL
> > of the web page is also clearly presented somehow.
>
>The GNU FDL requires credit be given to "one or more persons or entities
>responsible for authorship of the modifications in the Modified Version"
>
>As far as I can see this makes no distinction between the author of
>the quote and the person adding it to the GFDL document as they are both
>responsible for the authorship of the modification.
>
>Although we won't be storing the quote's author is in the history it will
>be clear from the document who precisely the author is, which is probably
>sufficient.
>
>Imran
>--
>http://bits.bris.ac.uk/imran
>

_________________________________________________________________
Have fun customizing MSN Messenger — learn how here!  
http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/reach_customize