Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On 11/20/05, Lars Aronsson <lars(a)aronsson.se>
wrote:
have agreed to this "implicit wiki
license".
And how to you reconcile this with the fact that there is a non
trivial amount of GFDLed content inserted into Wikipedia by someone
other than its copyright holder?
That is a good question. Copying GFDL text into a (GFDL) wiki and
then copying it out again without modifications (e.g. Wikisource)
would obviously be ok, but is this also legally compatible with
"normal wiki editing, as we know it" (i.e. my proposed "implicit
wiki license")? I don't know. Have there been any conflicts of
this kind, where a copyright owner has protested against their
GFDL text being copied into Wikipedia?
I know a lot of public domain (EB1911 etc.) text is going in, and
that is not a problem. But to what extent (and from where?) is
GFDL material being copied into Wikipedia? Foldoc? Wikitravel is
apparently CC-SA-BY, not GFDL.
--
Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se)
Aronsson Datateknik -
http://aronsson.se