On 21/04/2008, Ben Finney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > My advice would be to convince the copyright holder to re-license the > work under something more sane, like the GPL v2. That, at least, > doesn't require the license terms to be included in the redistributed > work.
We're talking about Wikipedia GFDL text, so that's not going to happen. CC-by-sa compatibility is anticipated in the near future, and GFDL 1.3 in the nearer future, so we could use "or later version" and do a CC-by-sa shuffle. But not right away. We already have spoken versions of Wikipedia articles on Wikipedia. These would presumably be a copyright violation if not right there on Wikipedia (which of course has the GFDL and complete article history linked on every page) - so can't be used elsewhere. Argh. Does running a Wikipedia article through Festival violate the copyright if you record it? ARGH. #include <gfdl-sucks-so-much.h> - d. _______________________________________________ Discussion mailing list [email protected] https://mail.fsfeurope.org/mailman/listinfo/discussion
