[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GFDL and Anonymity --- another problem?

On Thu, 2003-10-09 at 16:29, Mathieu Roy wrote:

> > I'd think so. Certainly the copyright is valid, and people can and do
> > release,
> Why is it certain?

The Berne convention says so, that'd be why the copyright is valid. And
if it isn't valid, then its in the public domain.

> A book under pseudonym is not anonym. The fact that you do not know
> what is the real identity of Emile Ajar does not make of his books
> published by an anonymous.

Sure. There are books published anonymously as well, come to think of
it. A quick Amazon.com search yielded quite a few books by Anonymous.

> You quoted the GFDL 4b:
> 	List on the Title Page, as authors, one or more persons or entities
> 	responsible for authorship of the modifications in the Modified
> 	Version, ....
> Well, what makes you think that in this case pseudonyms would not be
> allowed?

I don't think a pseudonym or "anonymous" is a "person." Now, if we can
sufficiently abuse "entities", that might work. For example, can I
decide to form the "Association of Associated Anonymous Hackers" to
release my changes to a single document, or does an "entity" have to be
a legal entity, such as a corporation?

> If nobody is able to confirm that he granted some rights over a work
> (because nobody recognize being author of this work), there is no
> reason to believe that you have some rights over this work.

If the work itself contains the notice that I am granted those rights,
then there is some reason to believe so. Adding an additional line
"Copyright 2003 Anthony DeRobertis" gives you no more real assurance
that I am legally authorized to grant the license.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Reply to: