On 12/21/06, Anthony <wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
By the way, you cut out the end: "and in the case
of a Derivative
Work, a credit identifying the use of the Work in the Derivative Work
(e.g., "French translation of the Work by Original Author," or
"Screenplay based on original Work by Original Author"). Such credit
may be implemented in any reasonable manner; provided, however, that
in the case of a Derivative Work or Collective Work, 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."
Is the credit being displayed for the image in the same place as the
text? No, it isn't. Is the credit for the images at least as
prominent as the credit for the text? Once again I'd say no.
Yes, I omitted an extra half paragraph which I felt supported my
argument, I thought I'd already made my point.
I thought the image page as as prominent as the history page, if not
the other way around (after all you often must go through many pages
of history to find the actual primary authors of a popular article
because of the flood of vandalism)... I'd certainly support changes
which make image attribution and text attribution more accessible and
equal, so long as such changes don't preclude a professional
appearance of the documents or create inappropriate incentives to
'contribute'.