[Foundation-l] Licensing resolution

[Mike.lifeguard]

Wikibooks uses GFDL. We do have some revisions which may be
multi-licensed, but it's probably not safe to assume that any books are
entirely multi-licensed (though some do make that claim).

-Mike

On Sat, 2009-05-23 at 02:12 +0100, David Gerard wrote:

> 2009/5/23 Mike.lifeguard <mikelifeguard at fastmail.fm>:
> 
> > I have been keeping an eye on what content got imported on English
> > Wikibooks. If there has been anything imported from offsite GFDL-only
> > sources I'm not aware of it. To be honest though, that's not saying much
> > - we often have contributors bring us whole books they wrote elsewhere -
> > but that's not a violation since they'd be the copyright holder and can
> > relicense it however they want. I doubt there are any similar cases
> > which do violate the terms, but I'd love some help checking that.
> 
> 
> What are licensing requirements for Wikibooks and Wikisource? Did they
> require GFDL or would any free license do, as is the case for Commons?
> 
> (I would have thought a freer choice of licenses would have been
> feasible, since works are likely to stay separate. I'd have
> particularly thought this the case for Wikisource.)
> 
> 
> - d.
> 
>