I saw somewhere that Wikimedia is changing over to a CC-by-3.x license in the near future after some changes were made to make compatable with GDFL/GNU requirements
On 19/11/2008, John Vandenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 12:33 AM, Brianna Laugher > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2008/11/19 Stephen Bain <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 12:10 AM, Brianna Laugher > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>> Of course it will be under a free > >>> license, probably CC-BY-SA. > >> > >> Dual CC-BY-SA / GFDL would be nice, that would make it compatible with > >> the Wikimedia projects (and our own wiki!). > > > > [I'm trying not to think about the licensing mess of transferring meta > > content to officialwiki, and then meta content (probably) goes to > > CC-BY-SA, but officialwiki doesn't because of the date cutoffs and > > blah blah... you see? Gawd...] > > > > Anyway dual licensing is of course a possibility, but I'm pretty sure > > as long as CC-BY-SA is in there it doesn't much matter what else is. > > :) > > The simple solution is to require that all members assign the > copyright of all wiki-text to WM-AU, or all members give WM-AU the > right to relicense it. Then by resolution of the committee, or an > AGM, it can be relicensed any way we wish, without needing to seek > permission from members who might be no longer available. > > -- > John Vandenberg > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimediaau-l mailing list > Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l > -- GN. http://gnangarra.redbubble.com/
_______________________________________________ Wikimediaau-l mailing list Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
