[Foundation-l] GFDL and Relicensing

[Ray Saintonge]

Robert Rohde wrote:
> Some of us, myself included, believe that commercial reuse SHOULD BE
> burdensome.  Or more specifically, if a commercial publisher is going to
> profit on the back of content they didn't create and with no funds going to
> the authors, then it should be dreadfully obvious that the content in
> question is free content, and not the run-of-the-mill restricted content
> that they always publish.  In some ways the GFDL is overboard in that regard
> (i.e. you don't need a long license document for a single image), but I
> believe publishers should be burdened with making their use of free content
> clearly identified.
>
> Also, I realize that not everyone feels the same way about being burdensome.
I have no problem with commercial reuse.  In a way it seems to me that 
NC licences are counterproductive.  We want the viral nature of the 
licence to infect the commercial sites. 

On the other hand, when it comes to fair use material, I don't think 
that it should be our duty to do the fair use evaluation for commercial 
operations.

Ec