I'd don't know if it is too late if we can get the Free Software Foundation to allow us to create a specific Wikimedia ver.2 successor license that will apply ONLY to what has been posted on Wikipedia on ver 1 licenses (it is currently 1.2, no?). I cannot see any reason why FSF would not allow that as it is within the spirit of open content and copyleft, it would just make it better for an online knowledge base to adapt the license that was originally written for software manuals so that it will encourage more distribution of knowledge. FSF certainly has the power to create a successor license to v.1.2 that will only apply to certain materials, unless of course if they want to do it so that anyone who uses v. 1.2 or a similar license that might be approved. Maybe we can have them put that similar licence successor clause put in so that it could then point to a native Wikimedia copyleft license (that would have been approved by FSF). All future content could be directly licensed under Wikimedia's native license (which could include a broad non-exclusive licencing clause and also an "as-is" warranty waiver which is not in the GNU FDL). alex756 "Jimmy Wales" jwales@bomis.com on Tuesday, August 05, 2003 9:01 PM wrote: >
Absolutely, except that now it is too late for Wikipedia.
If I were doing it all again with benefit of hindsight, I would have setup wikipedia *from the start* to require everyone to contribute under a disjunctive license that said, basically, people can redistribute under the terms of the GNU FDL or any other content license specifically approved by the FSF as free and copyleft.
--Jimbo _______________________________________________ Textbook-l mailing list Textbook-l@wikipedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l