[Foundation-l] The license situation

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
I would be seriously disappointed if the language of this deal explicitly
name Wikipedia. A proper text that allows for the migration of licenses of
content should be open for any project and any organisation under the same
rules. Given the size of the WMF and the urgency of the matter, I am really
happy for the WMF to take a leadership role in this.
Thanks,
        GerardM

On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 2:51 AM, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2008/10/18 Erik Moeller <erik at wikimedia.org>:
> > 2008/10/18 Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org>:
> >> I highly doubt the FSF is going to give the WMF exclusive rights to
> >> relicense GFDL content (the draft version used the text "you may
> relicense
> >> the Work", not "the WMF may relicense the work", or even "the original
> >> publisher of the work, even if they deny that they are a publisher, may
> >> relicense the work"),
> >
> > Please don't make assumptions based on drafts from two years ago. If
> > WMF does not choose to re-license content on Wikimedia's sites to
> > CC-BY-SA, there are limitations in place in the current re-licensing
> > language to prevent others from doing so.
>
> Does the section deal with the difference between content originate on
> wikipedia and GFDL content original hosted elsewhere?
>
> --
> geni
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>