On 11/14/06, Anthony <wikilegal(a)inbox.org> wrote:
When I first wrote this it said GFDL. Now it says
"Original logo
copyright Wikimedia Foundation. This picture is made of the hundreds
of free licenses of the images used to make it. Screenshot under the
GFDL (?)"
Which is a big contradiction. The logo is not under a free license,
so a derivative of it can't be under the GFDL. And many of the images
are under copyleft licenses, so derivatives can't be under a
non-commercial license.
Yeah, yeah, it's such a small deal, who cares... Considering the
nature of this project the answer should be "we do".
Anthony
this is the reason I've been removing wikimedia logos from wikipedia
whenever I run across them. The downside is that example.jpg is
apparently no longer culturally neutral and I'm worried that an edit
war is going to start on [[logo]]
--
geni