[WikiEN-l] Aneurysm

[Oskar Sigvardsson]

On 6/10/07, the wub <thewub.wiki at googlemail.com> wrote:
> Some users license their contributions by placing a statement on their
> user page. However they still have to release them under the GFDL
> also, see [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing]]. For example I release my
> edits into the public domain: [[User:The wub#Licensing]]. I'd say that
> such a positive statement counts as a release, however a
> misunderstanding of our copyright when submitting an edit probably
> wouldn't.

There is something I've been wondering about this whole
multi-licensing thing, and now seems as good a time as any to ask: how
can you multi-license your edits when the previous edits that you are
modifying specifically states that you have to license your edits
under the GFDL? I mean, if I edit a page that has previously been
edited under the GFDL, I'm making a derivative work and then I'm not
allowed to release my contributions into the public domain because the
GFDL specifically says that you have to use it for derived works. If I
were allowed to multi-license my own content that's based on others
work, I would in effect be making their content more free, even though
I don't hold the copyright to it.

Obviously this doesn't apply when you write an article from scratch or
rewrite an article completely, but those edits are in the minority.

I just don't see how this whole multi-licensing thing is legal.
[[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing]] doesn't really address this directly, so
could one of the smart legal minds on this list please enlighten me?

--Oskar