On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 11:49:15 +0100, Jure Spik <webdesign(a)carpediem.si> wrote: The GPL only applies to the use and modification of the program and its source code. It has no effect on the kind of content that can be hosted on a site running the MediaWiki software. Wikipedia itself licences its content under the GFDL, so that the encyclopedia articles themselves are licenced to be used in various ways by anyone who so wishes - obviously a law that fell under a more restrictive copyright would not be compatible with that. But there is no compulsion to use the same licencing arrangement just because you use the same software - if you set up your own wiki installation, you are as free to choose its copyright status as you would be for any other website. Similarly, you are free to modify the software in any way you so wish, such as to accomodate banners or interface changes. Here, the GPL does have an effect - IANAL, but this is my understanding: if your site is publically accessible, the exact nature of your changes to the core software must also be made public, since the GPL forbids you to have users who cannot build further on your changes. Basically, if you improve on the work given freely by others, you have to give your improvements equally freely. Hope this clarifies things a little. -- Rowan Collins BSc [IMSoP]

On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 14:43:41 +0200 (MEST), Alfio Puglisi <puglisi(a)arcetri.astro.it> wrote: Oops! Of course - I somehow muddled using the software in a publically visible way with distributing the software itself. -- Rowan Collins BSc [IMSoP]

Rowan Collins wrote: It is my impression that this is not true. It's perfectly o.k. under the GPL to use modified GPL code on a website without disclosing your modifications. http://slashdot.org/askslashdot/00/07/13/1831245.shtml Is a sort of old slashdot article about it.