[Foundation-l] Third-party GFDL text irrevocably incompatible with Wikipedia as of August 1

Ray Saintonge saintonge at telus.net
Thu May 28 08:28:56 UTC 2009


Samuel Klein wrote:
> Ray Saintonge wrote:
>   
>> Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) wrote:
>>     
>>> The point I was making is that I expect people will continue importing
>>> and exporting as per past practice with no attention given to the
>>> issue and few people caring. From a legal point of view that's not
>>> optimal, but I think it's highly likely.
>>>       
>> That's a reasonable expectation.  People who are not intimately involved
>> with the arcana of licensing will just turn off and ignore the
>> distinctions.  Others may just see the rush to get everyone changed the
>> short period between WMF's adoption of this switch and the deadline date
>> as an attempt by the big kid on the block to push its policies on others.
>>     
> We should certainly take care not to push anyone.  I would be
> delighted to see sites that do not wish to change sticking with the
> GFDL - that's excellent, and it is a great license for people who use
> it intentionally.  What I mind is sites realizing in half a year the
> implications of Wikimedia's switch, and despising the effect it has
> had on them, if they chose the GFDL (and perhaps put up with some of
> its quirks) simply for WP compatibility.
>   

As much as anything else it is the short time frame that will look 
pushy.  Wikipedia went through a lot of debate *before* the switch, and 
the internal debates of others should not matter less.  As I understand 
what is being said they will still be able to import from WMF projects; 
that would be more important to them than whether WMF projects import 
from them.  To say that they chose GFDL for WP compatibility may not be 
a sustainable presumption in most cases.  I doubt if many of them went 
through a lot of legal analysis before choosing a licence; an 
it's-as-good-as-anything attitude may very well have prevailed.  If WMF 
projects can't copy from them it will more likely enhance the uniqueness 
of their project, a potentially positive result in a competitive market.

Ec



More information about the foundation-l mailing list