[WikiEN-l] Citizendium's assertions about material from Wikipedia

[Ray Saintonge]

Anthony wrote:

>On 4/14/07, Steve Summit <scs at eskimo.com> wrote:
>  
>
>It's unclear whether or not it's true that you can't retract the GFDL.
> I've read before that if the GFDL is considered a waiver then it can
>be retracted at any time.
>
>Also note that the rights under the GFDL are automatically terminated
>whenever you "copy, modify, sublicense, or distribute the Document
>except as expressly provided for under this License".  And considering
>the fact that pretty much no one uses GFDL-contributed texts "as
>expressly provided for under" the GFDL, that means pretty much
>everyone has already had their rights under the GFDL terminated.  This
>part will probably be fixed in the next version of the GFDL.
>
>Finally, it seems to me it'd be near impossible for anyone but the WMF
>to show in court that the copyright holder ever licensed the work
>under the GFDL in the first place.
>
>So if a copyright holder ever really wanted to take back the
>GFDL-licensed text, it seems it'd be incredibly easy for them to do
>so.
>
Unless the license is withdrawn almost immediately, it would likely be 
impossible to enforce the withdrawal.  When the mirror sites pick it up 
their actions are based on the licence status when they take the 
material.  If this happens in the time between the granting and the 
withdrawal they have a legal copy.  The contributor wanting to withdraw 
would likely need to notify each of these sites individually.

Ec