Oh, I did awhile ago. It doesn't look totally cut and dry, but until it gets
a little clearer for me they are down.
Nathan
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 4:38 PM, Philippe Beaudette <
philippebeaudette(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yeah, to be blunt... Nathan, you're in over your
head on this one.
I'd suggest you pull them down until these issues are worked out.
_____________________
Philippe Beaudette
Tulsa, OK
philippebeaudette(a)gmail.com
On Jul 28, 2008, at 1:20 PM, effe iets anders wrote:
All Rights reserved is more restrictive then the
GFDL and therefore
not allowed to relisence with if I am informed correctly. Unless Knol
allowed GFDL as license option, or CC-BY-SA-3.0 *and* GFDL/CC-BY-SA
get compatible (not yet the case) you will not be allowed to upload
Wikipedia content to Knol unless you are the sole author (such as I
did with Ter Heijde I think)
Best regards,
Lodewijk
2008/7/28 Nathan <nawrich(a)gmail.com>om>:
Right, I'm not by any means an expert on the
licenses (everytime I
read
about them, I look them up again to remind myself what the
differences are)
and it did look to me like the issue was one of relicensing.
At any rate, they are all licensed appropriately now. Thank you to
whoever
made the suggestion of posting the notice and changing the
publication
option to "All rights reserved."
Nathan
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/
foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l