[Foundation-l] GFDL and relicensing

Anthony wikimail at inbox.org
Thu Nov 22 18:40:53 UTC 2007

On Nov 22, 2007 8:49 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 22/11/2007, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 22/11/2007, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > It's that last sentence which concerns me. There is a difference
> > > between something being illegal, and it getting you sent to jail or
> > > sued. I, for one, am not comfortable with relying on people's apathy
> > > to get away with breaking the law, however safe it may be.
> >
> >
> > Your assertion here that invoking the "or later" clause is breaking
> > the law is ridiculous.
> Define "the law". It seems to be a fact that it would be breaking
> French and German law. Has it been tested in a US court?

I think it'd be incredibly dependent on the specific details of the
case.  Does the DMCA apply?  Statute of limitations?  The doctrine of
laches?  Does it matter that the WMF has *never* followed the GFDL,
and is this an argument in favor of the accuser or the defense
(frankly, I could argue either)?  How similar is the new license in
spirit to the GFDL?  How similar is it to the de facto usage that
Wikipedia content has been used for years?  I don't think anyone who
claims to know with a large degree of certainty how such a case would
turn out is being at all honest.

More information about the foundation-l mailing list