On 9/24/06, David Alexander Russell webmaster@davidarussell.co.uk wrote:
- You can't legally require anyone to relicence their work just because
you decide you don't like the terms any more. They would be perfectly entitled to say 'fuck you' (or some lawyer-approved legalese equivalent) to the WMF
Legally? Who said anything about legally? We'd just be asking. Or perhaps make it part of the conditions of use for the site.
You can't legally require anyone to release their content under the GFDL. But we require it nonetheless for participants.
- Making all future contributions multi-licenceable would create two
problems: a) New contributions may be licence-incompatible with new ones b) A great deal of contributors would go to Citizendium instead
a. Multi-licensing doesn't have to mean exclusive licensing. I can say, "My contributions are licensed GFDL, or CC-BY-SA. You can pick the one which works best for you." Everything would be, at a minimum, GFDL. I don't see compatibility within the project as a problem. b. Why? Who cares? Is this really a threat -- a non-existant Wiki-to-be which requires credentials? Can we, for a moment now, at least stick with known problems, rather than making up new ones relating to what is currently Ghostware?
FF