I just
realized something, a site I posted on [[Wikipedia:Press
coverage]] might also be breaking the GFDL. They list some text from
one of our pages. See
http://cgi.canoe.ca/Columnists/diotte_jul7.html,
the SITE FOR SORE EYES article, which was in the Edmonton Sun. (my
original link appears to no longer be valid).
That's a pretty small excerpt, looks like fair use to me. It's
not in Wikipedia's interest to get so prickly that reporters and
writers deliberately avoid quoting it - or worse, that newspapers'
and publishers' legal departments order their employees to stay
away from Wikipedia altogether because they're tired of dealing
with accusations of GFDL violations.
I strongly agree with this. Copyright law is not trademark law. We can be
selective in our enforcement without losing the copyright.
Regards,
Erik