David Gerard wrote:
On 18/09/06, Fastfission fastfission@gmail.com wrote:
(I think the intent and basic mechanisms of the GFDL are great. I think the implementation is poor. I suspect that anything which implemented the GFDL as poorly as Wikipedia does would not hold up strongly in court.)
In particular, the GFDL for images is pretty much a pretend free-content licence and not effectively one at all. "Yes, you can freely reuse our images in print if you print the entire text of the licence next to it." Uh, yeah.
Here's a great cartoon explaining this, and why you should dual-license images:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:BD-propagande_colour_en.jpg