Brian McNeil wrote:
Going back to Wikinews, and our CC-BY license,
we've been using GFDL images
from Commons for ages - am I missing some subtle distinction between
licenses that means we're not in the wrong doing this? Some of the comments
in this discussion have suggested that if you use any GFDL content the
document containing it must also be GFDL.
The short answer is that nobody knows. It depends on whether an article
containing an image is a "derivative work" of the image. The FSF takes
the position that it is; the Creative Commons folk take the position
that it isn't; neither position has ever been tested in a court.
If you consider each body to be authoritative in interpreting their own
license, that would indeed mean that Wikinews can't use GFDL images in
non-GFDL articles. That does seem to be the intent of some (but not all)
authors who license their images under the GFDL: to prohibit the use
(without separate arrangements) of their works in non-GFDL media, like
proprietary-licensed newspapers. Whether this interpretation is
enforceable and/or should be respected is a matter of debate.
-Mark