[Foundation-l] Wikibooks NL is changing License

Lars Aronsson lars at aronsson.se
Fri Mar 23 03:03:36 UTC 2007

Thomas Dalton wrote:

> I interpret that as meaning edits to GFDL-only articles will be 
> dual licensed.

The edit (the diff) is not the same thing as the resulting 
(derivate) work.

Suppose somebody named Richard M. Stallman has written a fine 
manual (under GFDL) for the GCC compiler.  I write on my own 
website a little text called "some personal comments on the GCC 
compiler".  I have full copyright to my own original text, but I 
decide to dual license it under CC-SA-BY and GFDL.  Later RMS 
decides to include my text as a chapter in the GCC manual.  He can 
do this because it is licensed under GFDL.  But another person can 
reuse my text in another context based on its CC-SA-BY license.  
In the editing history of the GCC manual, the addition of my text 
is one step, "one edit", one contribution.  This contribution is 
apparently dual licensed.  But the GCC manual, both before and 
after this edit, is still only GFDL licensed.  That's not a 

RMS will probably never ask people to dual license their 
contributions, but I suppose he could if he wanted to.  And now 
the Wikibooks NL community will.  I see no problem with that.

Anybody who wants to make a contribution that is *only* GFDL 
licensed, can fork the project and do this on another server.  
The GFDL frees the contents (you can take it and walk away), but 
doesn't require anybody to provide a server for the editing.

  Lars Aronsson (lars at aronsson.se)
  Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se

More information about the foundation-l mailing list