[WikiEN-l] CC-BY-SA suitable for Wikipedia?

[Delirium]

Oskar Sigvardsson wrote:
> On 10/25/06, Chris Picone <ccool2ax at gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> Well, if I'm printing Wikipedia, I have to print it under the GFDL,
>> right? So I can't use the image. Besides, couldn't some crazy lawyer
>> in the future consider the article used by an image "derivative work"?
>>     
>
> There is no problem in printing a page with bout CC-BY-SA and GFDL on
> it. Aslong as you follow both licenses when you redistibute it. The
> images and text just have different licenses, that's all. If you
> follow them, you'll be fine.
>
> And no, when you include a picture of an image in an article, you are
> not making a derivative work of it. You are redistributing it. That's
> it.
>   

Yeah, this has been debated on and off, and the consensus (but shaky 
consensus) is what you say.

An argument can be made that illustrating a text with images is 
producing a new work that is derived from both the text and images, 
rather than merely aggregating them, but it's unclear whether that would 
hold up in court.  In particular, Wikipedia usually "just" displays 
images---we don't "illustrate" our articles in the integrated sense that 
a children's book does.

-Mark