On Dec 12, 2007 8:02 PM, John at Darkstar vacuum@jeb.no wrote:
I would very much like to see a license that is better suited to our actual needs, but I don't think it is very wise to break the rules, even if everyone agrees that it is a good thing to do.
We do not follow GFDL for the moment, and actually points to an internal technical feature as an easy way out. How can we ask others to respect the license when we don't follow it? And even worse, when we try to persuade FSF to change it so we can break it?
It has nothing to do with breaking the license whatsoever. Any plans to migrate to a different license (and they are just distant plans still) will be completely legal and legitimate. The GFDL is about promoting free content, not acting as an immutable anchor that drags us down because it was the only option available when we started this whole mess. If the GFDL can provide an "option" for works that aren't appropriate for the GFDL to be transmuted to a better alternative with the same spirit, that's in the best interests of WMF, FSF, and free content in general. Keep in mind that the FSF doesnt want the GFDL to go down in history as "the license that ruined wikipedia". That's bad press.
--Andrew Whitworth