On 26/03/07, Delirium delirium@hackish.org wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
On 26/03/07, Oskar Sigvardsson oskarsigvardsson@gmail.com wrote:
This is disgraceful. It's not like the Citizendium people doesn't understand the concept of free content.
Read the licensing thread on the forum:
http://forum.citizendium.org/index.php/topic,607.0.htmlIt's clear that many of the contributors don't, or don't care.
That thread is rather appalling, particularly the number of seemingly senior people (including Larry?) who are willing to countenance blatant copyright violations. I have written a number of articles, which I've released freely under the GFDL. I do not give anyone permission to release my work under another license, such as cc-by-nc, and it is no more legal to do that than it is for Citizendium to take a random copyrighted book out of the library and purport to release it under cc-by-nc. If they wish to use my copyrighted material under the GFDL, I have given them permission to do so. If they wish to use it under any other license, they must contact me to make separate arrangements.
-Mark
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
From the forum:
Larry Sanger: "The conclusion you are trying to establish is that we cannot relicense our versions of Wikipedia articles with GFDL and CC. Why not? Does the GFDL explicitly forbid licensing works under another license in addition?"
Is he seriously suggesting that they can basically just license our works under whatever license they please as long as they also license it under the GFDL?
I can't believe they've gone 'live' without even sorting out basic copyright issues... CZ is a joke.