[Foundation-l] status of the licensing update

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/2/19 Robert Rohde <rarohde at gmail.com>:
> In my opinion, it is incumbent upon us to give examples of how we
> believe third parties can legally and practically reuse WMF content by
> exercising rights under CC-BY-SA.  If we can't, in our collective
> wisdom, agree on how third parties ought to be able to accomplish that
> under the new license, then the license is probably inadequate for our
> needs.
>
> Now we don't have to cover every way that CC-BY-SA might be used.  And
> we don't have to go through every possible complication that might
> occur with wiki content.  But I do think we must be prepared to give
> concrete examples of how the license may be used in common
> applications, and that requires being willing to confront the question
> of "reasonable" attribution.
>
> If someone comes to us and says: "I want to print a copy of [[France]]
> in my book.  What is a reasonable way to comply with the license?",
> then we really ought to be able to answer that question.  If we can't
> agree on an acceptable answer to that question under CC-BY-SA, then we
> probably shouldn't be considering adopting it.
>
> For the record, I am open to the idea that we might well be able to
> get nearly everyone to agree on a set of "reasonable" usage guidelines
> consistent with the terms and spirit of CC-BY-SA, but I agree with
> Thomas that it is important that we address that either before or
> concurrent with the relicensing effort.

Excellently put, I agree 100%.