[Foundation-l] Copies of Wikipedia's articles found on Knol

[Anthony]

On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Mike Godwin <mgodwin at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> David Gerard writes:
>
>> We can and should (and, AFAIK, do) heartily support the CC-BY default
>> license. Because that's free content, and supporting that wherever it
>> springs up and making proper free content licenses the *expected
>> default* for reference works is 100% in line with WMF's mission.
>> Without us having to do the actual work!
>
> I think it's proper to say we don't oppose CC-BY, but that it's
> inconsistent with the licensing schemes we've embraced (GFDL and CC-BY-
> SA), because it's non-viral -- it doesn't require that derivative
> content be issued under the same free license under which it was
> distributed.
>
> I can't see how content distributed under the licenses Knol offers can
> be reproduced in WMF projects, and I can't see how content produced
> under WMF's licensing options can be reproduced in Knol.  To me, that
> raises a serious problem.
>
You seem to be forgetting about Wikinews.

But why can't CC-BY content be reproduced in WMF projects?  And how
could Knol fix that?  Even if Knol allowed licensing under the GFDL,
it still probably couldn't be reproduced in WMF projects, because WMF
projects don't support adding authors to the title page (among other
GFDL requirements).  Is any GFDL content currently reproduced in WMF
projects without special permission from the copyright holder?