6 ms·

Thanks for the detailed reply. I agree, Wikipedia indeed does enough to attribute, but I'm still a little bit concerned about the specific "Attribution Require

Thanks for the detailed reply. I agree, Wikipedia indeed does enough to attribute, but I'm still a little bit concerned about the specific "Attribution Requirements" listed on the File page (second block under #Licensing). Basically it states, modified or not, you need to keep the source "below the map", which some Wikipedia article pages obviously don't. What's your take about this "requirements" statement? Does it carry any weight, legally speaking? (By "concerned" i'm not saying UN would have an issue with Wikimedia, just the technicality with such requirement).

stordoff 6y ago
My take would be that the CC licence used does not allow you to add additional attribution requirements, so either the image is not CC licenced (which seems not to be the case), or the requirements don't carry any weight (so are essentially a request/a guide to how they would like to be attributed). I will admit I'm less certain on this than the broader terms of the CC licence though.