[Wikipedia-l] Re: image copyright

Mon Feb 16 17:34:44 UTC 2004

Anthere-

> And actually, when an author credit is *not* satisfied, we just say
> "well, your problem, you were nice to contribute. No, Wikipedia will not
> respect its engagement, you have to fight for your rights alone"

> Look, I spend hours in november and december writing the ecology article

> Look at the credit given to the five main authors

> http://www.slashdotsucks.com:8080/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Ecology&action=histo
> ry

> That is interesting no ?

> Or why is the article on wheat entirely writen by one person ?
> http://www.slashdotsucks.com:8080/wiki/wiki.phtml?title=Wheat&action=history

As I've said before, I consider Anthony's fork in violation of the FDL.  
Alex does not agree with me, at least not to a sufficient degree to see  
any legal recourse. So what can we do?

I see three possibilities:
1) Waste much of our time arguing with Anthony about his FDL  
interpretation, possibly hire a lawyer, possibly go to court, possibly  
lose.
2) Name clear conditions for how individual articles must be licensed. If  
Anthony refuses to comply, permanently ban him from editing Wikipedia.
3) Do nothing.

Option 2) seems the wisest to me. Anthony is clearly a troll who, like a  
vampire, wants to suck energy from us and our project. We should not give  
him what he wants. His "fork" seems to have no intention other than to  
piss people off. It will likely fade away into the darkness as he himself  
does.

Either he adjusts his behavior and can be unbanned, or he does not and he  
cannot. Whatever he does, we win: We either get rid of a persistent troll,  
or we get our interpretation of the FDL confirmed.

In my opinion, this is a decision Jimbo should make, as this is clearly a  
Wikimedia issue. I can only attribute his silence on the matter to him not  
haven taken notice of the fork and related discussion yet.

Regards,

Erik