I had a random thought today and think it is worth a cursory
consideration. Would it be (1) desirable, (2) technically feasible and
(3) legal to relicense Commons under a dual GFDL / Creative Commons
license as opposed to the current GFDL state?
<br><br>I don&#39;t no strong feelings about this, but I feel it is worthy
of a discussion. If it IS possible and legal (I&#39;m not a lawyer so I
don&#39;t know if it is possible or not), I think there might be beneficial
effects of it. For example, imagine the following scenario:
<br><br>An image is uploaded to Commons as CC-by-sa-2.5. A third party
then makes use of the image, under the terms of the CC license. In
addition to the image, they copy the description on the Image: page to
use as their caption. As the text of the page is licensed under the
GFDL, would this downstream user have violated the GFDL?
<br><br>If the answer to this question is yes, then there could be
significant benefits to a dual-licensing of Commons itself. If this
went anywhere, I&#39;d imagine the final decision would be made by the
Foundation, but the community ought to think it over first...
<br><br>What do people think? (If its daft, don&#39;t hold your punches I don&#39;t mind)<br><br>Nilfanion