--- Jimmy Wales jwales@bomis.com wrote:
Alex R. wrote:
I am not certain why there is a discussion of
assigning copyright
to the Wikimedia Foundation. Of course anyone is
free to make
such a contribution (though I doubt they will get
a tax deduction
for it) but it is not necessary IMHO for Wikimedia
to use materials
under the open license it already has, perhaps I
do not understand
the question, but what specifically cannot be
acheived with the
current open license that every Wikipedia
contributor grants when
they make contributions to any Wikipedia space?
I would say that the primary driving concern that we have is that there are starting to be materials published under other free and copyleft licenses (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike being most prominent) that are incompatible with the GNU FDL. We'd love to be able to cut and paste willy-nilly between all free resources, but we can't, due to issues of license incompatibility.
http://www.wikitravel.org, or example, is CC ATT-SA, so we can't use their materials and they can't use ours, not without specific permission. That's a real shame, and it's why I'm trying to get them to change their license while they are just starting to get off the ground.
--Jimbo
As a wikipedia author, why can't I relicence wikipedia content under the CC ATT-SA?
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com