Toby Bartels wrote:
This seems to me like a reasonable argument that the
NYTimes could make
to allow themselves to use mav's photo on their front page.
They'd have to argue that the front page is a *compilation*.
And if they really did include with mav's photo
everything that they'd need for the GFDL to apply when it's alone
(text of the licence, link to a source that hasn't been smudged, etc),
then I'd be inclined to let them get away with it.
I think that's exactly right. They would be in compliance with the
GNU FDL.