[Licom-l] a question about GFDL-only material

[Casey Brown]

On Fri, Apr 3, 2009 at 12:17 PM, Ryan Kaldari <kaldari at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand then, why we are still allowing GFDL-only media.

I'm assuming it's because media has always been handled separately
from text -- which is why we have all these separate licenses for
those and only one for actual text/content (GFDL, right now).

> Isn't the whole reason that people want to use GFDL for images because it's a "strong copyleft"?

Either that, or they have no idea which license to use and choose that
one because they think that we'd prefer it (since we use that for our
articles). :-)

> Doesn't that mean that any article that includes GFDL-only images
> cannot then be reused under CC-BY-SA. And if so, doesn't that
> contradict our new license statement?

Images are usually thought of as separate from the text. (This is
evident by the fact that when we tell people how to cite image use, we
tell them to note author, license, image description page *of the
image* rather than linking to the article and its author.)  Go to a
random article, chances are the article license (GFDL) and image
license (probably one of the CC licenses) are different -- yet we
still use them in the article.  Why should the situation change now
that it's reversed? (GFDL image, CC text)

I hope this makes sense, since it's late and I've been traveling for
most of the day... I might not be understandable. :-)

-- 
Casey Brown
Cbrown1023

---
Note:  This e-mail address is used for mailing lists.  Personal emails sent to
this address will probably get lost.