Development of Creative Commons licenses

[Brian Schack <spon0112 AT morehead-st.edu>]

On Mar 27, 2005, at 7:33 AM, Greg London wrote:
> Does that make wikipedia the queen bee
> since it has no attribution requirement?
>
> As for the answers to your questions,
> 180,000+ wikipedians answered that they
> don't do it for attribution.
...
> By your same argument, GNU-FDL should have caused
> a great number of Borg projects to spring forth
> because it doesn't require attribution either.

According to http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html,
> B. List on the Title Page, as authors, one or more persons or entities 
>  responsible for authorship of the modifications in the Modified  
> Version, together with at least five of the principal authors of the 
> Document (all of its principal authors, if it has fewer than five),  
> unless they release you from this requirement.
...
> I. Preserve the section Entitled "History", Preserve its Title, and 
> add  to it an item stating at least the title, year, new authors, and  
> publisher of the Modified Version as given on the Title Page. If  
> there is no section Entitled "History" in the Document, create one  
> stating the title, year, authors, and publisher of the Document as  
> given on its Title Page, then add an item describing the Modified  
> Version as stated in the previous sentence.

Plus you have to give the network location, acknowledgments, 
dedications, endorsements, front-cover texts, back-cover texts, and 
invariant sections.