On 10/21/07, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/21/07, Ron Ritzman <ritzman(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> What do you think the WMF should do if it
*did* have a clear legal
> case? What if someone called their proprietary encyclopedia
> "Wikipedia Premium Edition"?
[snip]
Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think
that under the GFDL,
anybody is free to take our content, repackage it and sell it for a
zillion dollars without giving us shit as long as they also license it
under the GFDL allowing another someone to sell it for a zillion
dollars and not give them shit. Isn't that one of the reasons we don't
allow "non commercial use only" and "Wikipedia only" licenses on
images?
Indeed but the there are two key points you might be missing:
1) They can take the content but only if they keep it under the GNU
Free Documentation License, as you noted, which pretty much precludes
the 'proprietary' mentioned in the ancestor post.
Yes, I was actually thinking a situation where the content was
original - like if Microsoft decided to rename Encarta to "Wikipedia
Premium Edition" or something.
Personally I'd have no problem with someone taking Wikipedia,
repackaging it, calling it "Wikipedia Premium Edition", and selling it
for a zillion dollars, so long as they acknowledged that the content
was GFDL. But that's a situation the WMF probably *would* sue over.