[Foundation-l] Multi-licensing situations on page text

[Kwan Ting Chan]

On Mon, 2007-11-19 at 02:37 +0000, Oldak Quill wrote:
> Sorry Robert, I was wrong about this. A post at cc-licenses mailing
> list (http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/cc-licenses/2005-May/002265.html)
> cleared things up. So only original works can be dual licensed, and
> derivatives have to be licensed under either GFDL or CC-by-sa and
> _cannot_ be licensed under both?

IANAL.

Even if one or both license require you to license any derivatives work
under that particular license (or later version), that does not prevent
you from re/dual-licensing a derivative work taking a different license
as base as long as your re/dual license is the same license (or later
version if allowed). You can think of it as having two branch of work
available, one is license (say) under GFDL, and one CC. They just both
happen to have the same exact content.

In practise, you would of course have to have every editor from the
beginning agreeing to release under both license. If any single editor
release only under one, the work would then be only under that one
license, any derivative work can't then be under the other license.

KTC

-- 
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
  - Heinrich Heine
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/foundation-l/attachments/20071119/7f05c108/attachment.pgp