[Foundation-l] Proposed revised attribution language

[Thomas Dalton]

2009/3/16 Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org>:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 10:29 AM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> 2009/3/16 Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org>:
>> > I've never pressed "submit" on a button which read "GFDL 1.2 or later".
>>  Try
>> > again.
>>
>> The edit page has said "or later" as long as I can remember. Are you
>> claiming that it didn't used to? What did it used to say and when?
>
>
> It still doesn't.  There is a place where it says "Version 1.2 or any later
> version published by the Free Software Foundation", which was added in March
> 2007.

So it does say it... you are contradicting yourself. What did it say
before March 2007? If it just said "GFDL" (which I think is likely),
then that implicitly means "or later" (the license text makes that
clear).

> But CC-by-sa is not published by the FSF, and the word "published",
> according to Wiktionary, is in the past tense (and I have not clicked submit
> since Version 1.3 was released).  So that argument fails in many ways,
> before even getting to the problems with GFDL 1.3 itself.

Obviously when reusing it you need to reuse it under a license that
was published in the past, that's what is meant by the use of the past
tense and I think that is perfectly clear to any reasonable person. We
know CC-BY-SA isn't an FSF license, the FSF have released a new
version of GFDL allowing relicensing under CC-BY-SA (as you well
know), so what are you claiming, that the "or later" part is invalid
or that a license which allows relicensing under a different license
is invalid?