Regarding the Wikipedia license change ...... It is my belief that after they make their
change, Wikinews will be able to cut and paste passages from Wikipedia.Is my assumption
correct or false?It would be helpful in quickly creating background information for
articles and eliminates one place we have to look for copyvios.SVTCobra----- Original
Message -----From: Jon Davis Date: Monday, March 2, 2009 1:37 amSubject: Re: [Wikinews-l]
License change?To: Wikinews mailing list > Yea. Forgive me. For some reason I had the
wild ass notion that > the old> articles were GFDL. I really don't know where
that came from.> > -Jon> > On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 22:18, Ilya Haykinson >
wrote:> > > I agree with Bawolff on this one. The license change is mainly a>
> problem for GFDL wikis, which suffer from some problems with> > attribution and
reuse in CC-licensed projects as a result of their> > license. We do not have this
issue, and don't really need to change.> > Even if we wanted to, we would face
an uphill battle in making our> > license more restrictive retroactively. Unless
there's an overriding> > reason to do so, I'd elect to retain our more-free
license in place.> > Goodness knows, we don't need _more_ restrictions on reuse
of > Wikinews> content ;-)> >> > -ilya> >> > On Sun, Mar 1,
2009 at 5:04 PM, bawolff > >> wrote:> > > From my understanding, wmf
wants to change the lices from > gfdl to> > > cc-by-sa-(3? not sure on
version) which is quite different > than cc-by> > > (similar to the difference
between GPL and BSD from my > understanding).> > We also don't really have
the ability to > arbitrary change license (we> > > could say something like
from this day forward, everything > is blah> > > license, but thats
messy).> > >> > > Anyways, i think our license is pretty good. Many
people > feel that> > > modifying wikinews content without allowing
redistribution > is a> > > perfectly good use of our content, which a change
in license would> > > disallow.> > >> > > --> > > -
bawolff> > >> > > p.s. everything before sep 05 is PD, not GFDL. We
currently > have only> > > a single gfdl article in all of wikinews (not
counting help > ns +> > > images)> > >> > >> >
>> > > On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Jon Davis > wrote:> >
>> I realize we all _love_ a conversation about changing > licenses... but>
> here I> > >> go.> > >>> > >> The WMF has been
disusing the change of WP from GFDL to CC-> BY (since> > that is> >
>> now allowed for a short period of time). Since everything > newer than>
> Sept> > >> 05 on en.wn is CC-BY-2.5 (and everything older than that is
> GFDL)... why> > >> can't we "upgrade" all the old articles
to CC-BY also? I > realize we> > don't> > >> "need" to
do it, as the old articles are of little interest > to most> > people,> >
>> but we have the opportunity... shouldn't we take it?> > >>>
> >> -Jon> > >> [[User:ShakataGaNai]]> > >>> >
>> --> > >> This is a test of the emergency sig system.> >
>>> > >> _______________________________________________> >
>> Wikinews-l mailing list> > >> Wikinews-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> >
>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l> > >>>
> >>> > >> > >
_______________________________________________> > > Wikinews-l mailing list>
> > Wikinews-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> > >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l> > >> >> >
_______________________________________________> > Wikinews-l mailing list> >
Wikinews-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org> >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l> >> > > > --
> This is a test of the emergency sig system.> > Oh, and the following location
only accurate +/- 100 miles. So > if you're> coming to get me, better send a
nuke.> Sent from: Sunnyvale CA United States.>