--- Tomos at Wikipedia <wiki_tomos(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
There is another solution to this problem in
discussion at Japanese
Wikipedia and Wiktionary. It is a bit easier than the migration to GNU Free
Content License, though I would love to see it happen soon.
We may introduce another license - so-called "intra-site public domain
license" or "intra-wikimedia public domain license." What the license says
is something like this:
"by contributing to Wikipedia, you allow others to use your contributions
within Wikipedia's projects as if they are in public domain."
While I think this does reflect actual practice, I'm not sure if it is at all
legal or practical (esp since IANAL). For example, I would assume that any
current GFDL-only article could not be edited under such a dual license until
the authors of the GFDL-only article agree to dual license their work.
Why? Because the edited article is a derivative work of the original and since
the original was only under the GFDL, the derivative work can only be under the
GFDL. The only way to really change that is to get permission from all the
article's authors to add another license.
-- Daniel Mayer (aka mav)
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
http://messenger.yahoo.com/