David Gerard wrote: > 2009/6/24 Durova <nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com>: > > >> Well, taking a first stab at this. Here's my letter to Wired: >> Per the recent New York Times admission that one of your editors plagiarized >> content from Wikipedia uncredited, I respectfully request credit for media >> work of mine that Wired has reproduced without credit. >> > > > Restoration is painstaking work on behalf of the cultural commons and > well worth encouraging and crediting. > > It's a different question whether it can use the same big stick of > copyright that CC or GFDL can. Possibly not in the US, per Bridgeman > vs Corel. (Though any actual statement on the subject would have to be > in court.) > > I would expect that asking nicely and encouraging credit of restorers > is the best that can be done at this stage, and that it strikes me as > worth doing. > > I'm not entirely sure that I'd agree that not crediting a restorer > (when crediting the original) would count as "plagiarism." That's a > different kettle of fish, I think. > >
I agree. But on the moral rights angle, it does breach the inalienable right of paternity to a work. Paternity is there even for modifications. Yours, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
