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

[Anthony]

On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Mike Godwin <mgodwin at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> 1) With regard to CC-BY:
>
> It's not a question of one license's being more restrictive than the
> other, exactly. It's that the Share Alike (SA) requirement, which
> makes the content truly copyleft, can't be added or subtracted in any
> straightforward way that I can see. (Note that for purposes of
> simplicity I am lumping together GFDL -- Wikipedia's current licensing
> standard -- and CC-BY-SA.  Their requirements are substantively mostly
> the same although formally different.)
>
> How could you add SA, for example, without being the original
> licensor, for importing to Wikipedia?
>
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 9:39 AM, Mike Godwin <mgodwin at wikimedia.org> wrote:
> 1) With regard to CC-BY:
>
> It's not a question of one license's being more restrictive than the
> other, exactly. It's that the Share Alike (SA) requirement, which
> makes the content truly copyleft, can't be added or subtracted in any
> straightforward way that I can see. (Note that for purposes of
> simplicity I am lumping together GFDL -- Wikipedia's current licensing
> standard -- and CC-BY-SA.  Their requirements are substantively mostly
> the same although formally different.)
>
> How could you add SA, for example, without being the original
> licensor, for importing to Wikipedia?

The SA license would apply to the derivative work.  The non-SA license
would apply to the original work.  You aren't "adding SA", you're
creating a new work, and licensing that new work under SA.

I really don't understand the question.  If it can't be legally done,
what law are you breaking?  Whose copyright is being violated?