G'day Julie,
---- Steve Bennett <stevage(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/5/06, Pete Bartlett <pcb21(a)yahoo.com>
wrote:
Yep if you could just spend a couple of minutes
unifying the
licences for us Guy that would be great ;-).
Wikitravel and Wikipedia have incompatible licenses?
You guys just like to complain. So go ahead and tell everyone, what
are the consequences that the licenses...(you are spelling it wrong!)
No, he isn't. You need a better dictionary; one that recognises that
the world outside the USA does not necessarily speak American.
are incompatible? They are both separate entities.
They are both
businesses. People should be happy that they are licensed.
Enlighten us, what are these horrible consequences? -Julie
Wikipedia and Wikitravel are both under "free" licences. This means
that we both allow our content to be re-used, under certain conditions
(for example, always citing the original authors, derivative works must
be licenced the same way). In theory, then, we could share our content.
But if Wikitravel's licence is more restrictive than ours (say,
refusing to allow commercial use) then we cannot use it, because we
promise anyone who re-uses content from Wikipedia that it's okay for
commercial use.
This may not seem particularly terrible, depending on your view of
copyright law, but it's certainly not a Good Thing.
--
MarkGallagher
"What? I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!"
- Danger Mouse
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.392 / Virus Database: 268.5.5/333 - Release Date: 5/05/2006