[Foundation-l] Projects without >FDL1.2 migration clause

[John at Darkstar]

Changing a binding license contract in Norway opens up for users opting
out of the contract. I have absolutly no idea how this can be handled in
colaborative works like Wikipedia. I do not know if any user will opt
out, but it seems very clear to me that the possibility exist. If so, I
don't think there exist any tool that can automate this process.

I'm no lawyer so it might exist some solutions to this, but I think it
would be very wise to check this out and not just speculating about the
matter.

John

Jimmy Wales skrev:
> Brianna Laugher wrote:
>  > If no version is specified, then there is no problem:
>  >
>  > 10. FUTURE REVISIONS OF THIS LICENSE:
>  > "If the Document does not specify a version number of this License,
>  > you may choose any version ever published (not as a draft) by the Free
>  > Software Foundation."
>  >
>  > The only potential problem is if there are projects saying "license
>  > under GFDL v1.2 [only]".
> 
> I think this is important, thank you Brianna.
> 
> I think it is absolutely untrue that any of our projects is licensed 
> under conditions that do not allow "or any later version".  In any 
> event, this has never been approved by the board or, as far as I know, 
> by any community.
> 
> There have been, in the past, some discussions by people who are not 
> lawyers about questions of whether "or any later version" clauses are 
> possibly problematic in some legal jurisdictions.  I am unaware of any 
> lawyer for the Foundation, for FSF, or for CC (who has the most 
> international set of lawyers working on their licenses) ever actually 
> making that claim.  (But it is possible that someone has, I am just 
> unaware of it.)
> 
> --Jimbo
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>