Re: GPL in wiki: [RFR] draft for "DebianWiki new license"
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Frank Lin PIAT<fpiat@klabs.be> wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 00:43 +0900, Osamu Aoki wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 10:41:25AM +0300, Andrei Popescu wrote:
>> > On Tue,16.Jun.09, 08:43:34, Frank Lin PIAT wrote:
>> > >
>> > > BTW, I am not completely sure that one can write a document with some
>> > > paragraphs under GPL and some other under CC-BY-SA, and have a license
>> > > statement like "some parts on this documents are licensed under GPL and
>> > > some parts are licensed under CC-BY-SA".
>> >
>> > I don't think this is possible. Maybe if the GPL parts can exist without
>> > the CC-BY-SA parts, otherwise you have to distribute it all under the
>> > GPL (which CC-BY-SA prevents).
>>
>> FYI: "Debian Reference" origin contents has been removed and it has been
>> reintegrated to www.debian.org under DDP.
>>
>> Unless someone else had GPL pages, you may not need to worry about my
>> old pages.
>
> I think we should not only be concerned about "known" GPL projects that
> could be dual licensed (like DR, DebianEdu, NewInLenny). we should
> consider the contents that could/should be merged various GPL
> documentations.
>
> Still, you raise an important point.
What about the same license as wikipedia?
Wikipedia changes its license to
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Licensing_update
CC-BY-SA 3.0
and
what is left of gfdl
"Specifically, the Wikimedia Foundation proposal is to amend site-wide
licensing terms and terms of use for all projects as follows:
1. to make all content currently distributed under the GNU Free
Documentation License (with “later version” clause) additionally
available under CC-BY-SA 3.0, as explicitly allowed through the latest
version of the GFDL;
2. to require continued dual-licensing of new community edits in
this manner, but allow CC-BY-SA-only content from third parties
(However, GFDL-only content from third parties is no longer allowed);
3. to inform re-users that content which includes imported
CC-BY-SA-only information cannot be used under the GFDL.
"
Lucas
Reply to: