[Foundation-l] Licensing transition: opposing points of view

Nathan nawrich at gmail.com
Mon Mar 23 19:47:57 UTC 2009

Introducing the terms of service, or anything other than the license itself,
confuses it for me too. The questions it brings to my mind are:

1) Which controls attribution, the license or the TOS?
2) For importation, which determines compatibility - the license or the TOS
of the original site (if applicable)?
3) (A restatement of 1) If the license and the TOS conflict, which controls?
4) If the intended form of attribution is seen as being allowed via the TOS,
does the TOS then constitute the actual license (as opposed to GFDL 1.2)?

A lot of this is deeply technical. I'm not clear on who is right, but wrt to
writing and debating skill alone the pro-transition folks are clearly at an
advantage. What I'd like to see is calmly argued and defined opposition;
without recourse to "You're an idiot, and I know phrase X means Y because I
said so." When Erik, Mike Godwin and Michael Snow make concise and well
written arguments, and get replies in the form of short inline comments
along the lines of "No, you're wrong" it doesn't help anyone get a good
picture of what the problems here are supposed to be.


More information about the foundation-l mailing list