Section 178 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 defines this kind of work as a 'collective work' namely :
"
(a) a work of joint authorship, or
(b) a work in which there are distinct contributions by different authors or in which works or parts of works of different authors are incorporated;"
A work of joint authorship is defined in Section 10(1) as follows: “
work of joint authorship" means a work produced by the collaboration of two or more authors in which the contribution of each author is not distinct from that of the other author or authors"
So unless your individual contribution is in some way marked out distinctly from the contributions of others, you are treated as a joint author, although in theory this is not much different to the rights you would enjoy as a sole author under copyright law. But as CopyrightAid has said, the rules or terms of the site are likely to close up any loopholes and effectively nullify your individual rights. In reality if there were dozens of different ''joint authors' with no formal agreement (eg like this one
http://blog.ericgoldman.org/personal/ar ... oragmt.htm) binding them together I doubt if the law could deal equitably with them all if they wanted to exploit their copyright in different ways.
For anyone interested in the subject of joint authorship apart from the specific issue raised by the OP, this article on the US law is quite interesting.
http://www.ivanhoffman.com/jointauthors.html. Although US copyright law differs from UK law in some respects, there are many parallels with the way in which a UK court would treat such matters.
