These issues are only being worked out because of Nathan's experiment. Kudos to him!
On Mon, Jul 28, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Philippe Beaudette < philippebeaudette@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@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@gmail.com:
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@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/ foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l