On 11.05.2009 18:42 Uhr, Gervase Markham wrote:
On 11/05/09 16:51, Axel Hecht wrote:
I'm sure OK with this, but reading through
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl-1.3-faq.html, I'm not sure if all our
material on wikimo actually falls under those terms, or if it just
helps us to limit the impact of people that we had to ask now? I'm
slightly confused by the impact of the two dates mentioned.
I'm pretty sure all material on wiki.mozilla.org is covered, but if
someone thinks otherwise, they should say.
There are three conditions:
1) The work must be available under the terms of FDL 1.3, which provides
you with this permission. If the work was released under the terms of
“the GNU Free Documentation License, version 1.2 or (at your option)
any later version,” then it meets this criteria. *
wiki.mozilla.org is available under "the GNU Free Documentation License
(GFDL)": https://wiki.mozilla.org/MozillaWiki:About
I can't immediately see a version number on the copyrights page, and the
FDL says:
"If the Document does not specify a version number of this License, you
may choose any version ever published (not as a draft) by the Free
Software Foundation."
2) The work must not have any “Cover Texts” or “Invariant Sections.”
These are optional features in all versions of the FDL.
wiki.mozilla.org does not use either of these features.
3) If the work was originally published somewhere other than a public
wiki, it must have been added to a wiki (or some other kind of web
site where the general public could review and edit the materials)
before November 1, 2008.
As far as I know, all wiki.mozilla.org content was originally published
on a public wiki (wiki.mozilla.org itself) so this clause does not
apply. And even if some was not, if it was added before November 1st
2008, we are OK anyway. We only have a problem if there's content on
there which was originally published elsewhere and then was added to
wiki.mozilla.org after November 1st 2008.
On an abstract level, GNU here reinforces my "ugh" on their "and
future versions of this license", as they're passing the license from
one group (GNU) to another group (CC) by the decision of a third
(MMC). And their rationale is more like "whatever".
MMC?
Their term in the license to say wiki without saying wiki, though they
say wiki at one point :-)
Thanks for the reply
Axel
_______________________________________________
legal mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/legal
