"Jean-Baptiste Soufron" wrote:
As far as I can say, if we want to avoid any risk of
misunderstanding, it would be much better to use CC material to
explain CCBY2.5
The problem I notice (sorry I have not the licence at hand to cite) is that the licence
says
that you should state the author in the way was given by the author.
As well as a link to the licence we need to provide the information of how to give the
right credit.
But even so, these licenses were not written for being used on such
content as Wikinews. There will be problems of interpretation and
application that will require some material on our own to guide
content reusers.
If this is really the case (is it?) and problems occur then we will better
consider if changing the licence to a different type of licence is better.
Still, that's not the case yet and we should stick
to CC
explanation material as much as we can.
AnyFile
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at
Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm