[Foundation-l] Let's switch to CC-BY-SA

[Anthony]

On 9/13/07, Delirium <delirium at hackish.org> wrote:
> Brian McNeil wrote:
> > Going back to Wikinews, and our CC-BY license, we've been using GFDL images
> > from Commons for ages - am I missing some subtle distinction between
> > licenses that means we're not in the wrong doing this? Some of the comments
> > in this discussion have suggested that if you use any GFDL content the
> > document containing it must also be GFDL.
> >
>
> The short answer is that nobody knows. It depends on whether an article
> containing an image is a "derivative work" of the image. The FSF takes
> the position that it is; the Creative Commons folk take the position
> that it isn't; neither position has ever been tested in a court.
>
You must be misexplaining the question, because it's quite obvious
that an article containing an image is a "derivative work" of the
image.  I seriously doubt the Creative Commons folk take the position
that it isn't.

Has the FSF ever been asked if an article containing an image is a
"derivative work" of the text?  Because it's quite obvious that that
is true as well.

> If you consider each body to be authoritative in interpreting their own
> license, that would indeed mean that Wikinews can't use GFDL images in
> non-GFDL articles.  That does seem to be the intent of some (but not all)
> authors who license their images under the GFDL: to prohibit the use
> (without separate arrangements) of their works in non-GFDL media, like
> proprietary-licensed newspapers. Whether this interpretation is
> enforceable and/or should be respected is a matter of debate.
>
> -Mark