On 8/23/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand... what part of the GFDL is violated?
Section 4.
If memory serves, section 4 is quite large. Could you save me reading through the whole thing and just tell me in English what we're doing wrong?
Not really. The GFDL tells you what you *can* do, not what you *can't* do. If you want to apply the GFDL to a work, first you have to define "the Document". You can't really do this without actually reading the license.
Frankly it's difficult to make the GFDL work for much of any of what Wikipedia is doing. It doesn't fit in straightforwardly with section 4 part A, B, C, D, E, F, I, or J. And the other parts aren't really in compliance so much as they just don't apply. You could probably make some convoluted definitions of "the Document" to kind of sort of be in compliance with some of the license, but if I defined "the Document" for you and then explained how that definition didn't work I'd just be creating a strawman argument.