[Foundation-l] Citizendium License (Was: [EWW] Edit Wikipedia Week)

[GerardM]

Hoi,
Citizendium has created a fine mess. There are several people that I know
that refuse to have anything to do with Citizendium because of the lack of
transparency as to their license. Also with Larry's latest blog about this
subject he raises doubt yet again as to what license Citizendium will use.
At this moment it is not, as far as I know licensed at all.

Now you come along and say .. nah, NC is not an option we cannot even
re-license our content. Were we to do that we might as well start a new
project. Well actually, does this mean that you cannot license your content
at all?

Thanks,
     GerardM

On Nov 21, 2007 11:53 AM, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 21/11/2007, luke brandt <shojokid at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > CZ have always promised to be _open content_ and [[open content]] can be
> > -NC. At least WP says it can. As a non-profit project isn't Wikipedia
> > free to use NC if it wishes, though re-users would have to be warned. --
>
> In a hypothetical sense, yes, we're "allowed" to use NC. In a
> practical sense, though...
>
> a) we said we won't ;-)
>
> b) we can't without either abandoning all our existing content, or
> getting every single author of every bit we want to keep to agree to a
> relicensing. Even if they were all willing, simply finding them and
> recording their agreement would be near-impossible...
>
> The latter basically means we can't relicense even if we wanted to,
> and if you're going to junk all our content and start again, you may
> as well just call it a new different project whilst you're at it.
>
> --
> - Andrew Gray
>  andrew.gray at dunelm.org.uk
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>