El dom, 10-08-2008 a las 12:59 -0700, Bennett Haselton escribió:
> At 12:39 PM 8/10/2008, Francis Tyers wrote:
> >How can the updated FDL be said to apply to > that work if the
> >authors didn't agree to it? Doesn't the licence text say "GFDL 1.2
> >or later" ? "Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify
> >this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License,
> >Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software
> >Foundation;"
>
> Ah OK, that makes sense.
>
> By the way, that means that if authors are submitting content to
> Wikipedia, with the intention that nobody would be able to create a
> derived work from their article and slap "all rights reserved" on it,
> those authors are putting a lot of trust in the Free Software
> Foundation, aren't they? Since the FSF might someday release a
> version of the FDL which allows third parties to create derivative
> works published under "all rights reserved", like CC-BY does. (Not
> that the FSF is ever likely to do that, obviously, but it's still
> unusual to have an agreement that one party can unilaterally change
> at any time in the future.)
Yep, we all trust in the FSF :)
Fran