[Foundation-l] GFDL and relicensing

[Mike Godwin]

Robert Hornung writes:

>  What I'm talking about here is a simply presumption that you don't  
> even
> need to involve the FSF in this discussion, that that all you simply
> need to perform is a mass license migration, ignoring the fact that  
> all
> of the content is currently licensed under the GFDL.

You must have confused this conversation with some other  
conversation.  All of the talk of migration here is based in *actual,  
ongoing discussions* among FSF, CC, and WMF.  FSF would have to agree  
to any version of the migration that we're talking about. Were you  
unaware of these discussions?

> What I expect that the FSF is going to do with the GFDL is to work out
> some legal language to make it work with Wikipedia a bit better.

Right -- and FSF is considering doing this by creating a CC-compatible  
license.

>  I certainly don't
> know how you could get GPL/CC-by-SA compatibility to work at all.

Both licenses would have to be revised in order to be harmonized,  
everyone agrees.

> I'll add here that I add contributions to Wikimedia projects using my
> actual given name, rather than using a psuedonym.  One of the  
> reasons I
> do this is explicitly because I do assert copyright over my
> contributions, and to make the point that I can legally claim each  
> edit
> I've performed.

If the migration happens, I will support 100 percent any request by  
you to remove your content rather than have it be interpreted under a  
new, harmonized GFDL/CC license.


--Mike