2008/11/4 Robert Rohde rarohde@gmail.com:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 3:21 PM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
2008/11/3 geni geniice@gmail.com:
What are the terms of the agreement? There are various ways of implementing duel licensing and I would like to know which ones are legit.
[begin quote from Richard]
- ALL contributors agree to the following:
Wikipedia can release their newly written text under both GFDL and CC-BY-SA in parallel. However, if they imported any external material that's available under CC-BY-SA and not under GFDL, Wikipedia is bound by that.
All old revisions are released under GFDL | CC-BY-SA.
All new revisions are released with this license statement:
This page is released under CC-BY-SA. Depending on its editing history, it MAY also be available under the GFDL; see [link] for how to determine that. [end quote from Richard]
The sometimes, sort of, dual licensing provisions be advocated here strikes me as impractical.
As I understand it, and correct me if I am mistaken, the goal is to dual license all existing content and all future content directly created by Wikipedians.
Doesn't matter. The wording allows us to release all future content directly created by Wikipedians CC-BY-SA only.