On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 2:26 PM, Bryan Tong Minh
<bryan.tongminh(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 2:08 PM,
<psychoslave(a)culture-libre.org> wrote:
On Tue,
Nov 4, 2008 at 1:49 PM, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> 2)It's taken years to get the FSF to agree to let us get around one
> set of compatibility problems. Switching to FAL means we may end up in
> the same situation with a different organisation
>
Not to mention the uncertainty that arises from the lack of an
aggregration clause in the FAL.
Bryan
What do you mean by "aggregration clause", I fail to understand ? Could
you tell it with other words, please ?
The aggregration clause is a clause in the GFDL that allows you to
combine both GFDL and non-GFDL work into one aggregration. We rely on
this clause to embed non-GFDL images in GFDL text.
The FAL does unlike the GFDL and CC licenses not contain such a clause
and it is undetermined whether you can legally use FAL work in
combination with GFDL or CC licensed work. (AFAIK, IANAL)
Bryan
I am confused now, because there is a clause called "Incorporation of
the work". I am probably confusing this license with an other, but I
can't remember which.
Bryan