Thomas Dalton wrote:
2009/2/7 David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>om>:
Anyone can take any idiot question to court. That
doesn't count as a
reason to assume that there must therefore be a substantive reason to
believe that the "or later" language doesn't apply. Nor does being
unable to prove a negative.
I don't understand what you are trying to say. Some people have
indicated that certain jurisdictions have laws against "or later"
clauses. Experts in the laws of these jurisdictions should be asked to
determine the truth.
At the very least, it seems to empirically not be a problem.
The GPL has
included the "or later" language since it was first published in 1989,
and has since gone through two updates (the first in 1991), without, as
far as I can find, a single ruling invalidating that language. And
GPL-licensed stuff has *much* more extensive worldwide commercial reuse
than Wikimedia content does.
-Mark