[Commons-l] GFDL-1.2 only - deletion discussion

[Codeispoetry]

On Thu, March 13, 2008 9:33 pm, Robert Rohde wrote:
> Could you elaborate on what you are refering to?   It is hard for me to
> imagine how the presense of absense of "or later versions" could really be a
> significant disruption to the project, given that there isn't even a later
> version to refer to.
>
> -Robert A. Rohde
>
> PS. Along with Gmaxwell, I am one of those people who uses GFDL-1.2 rather
> than simply GFDL because as a matter of principle I prefer not to agree to
> new licenses until I've at least had a chance to review them.

As far as I know there are current efforts to greatly enhance compatibility between GFDL and
CC-by-sa, this of course would need a new GFDL version. There is a common practice of some de
users to use GFDL as sort of noncommercial license since GFDL basically does not allow any
commercial use for practical reasons, and they want to keep it that way with limiting there files
to 1.2. This winter there were even mass edits relicensing CC files to GFDL and later hiding the
old version and licensing via commons transfer. These activities clearly were not performed with
the idea of free content in mind and thus against one of our major guidelines. I'm sorry for
associating you with such efforts, that was not my intention ;-)

Regards,
Adrian / Codeispoetry