Re: GFDL 1.3

Alex Hudson <home@...> writes:
> I'm not a big fan [...] limiting them by date

There's flexibility and risk in there in that those works can be relicensed
to cc-by-sa-3.0 *or* "future copyleft versions of that license".

This gives Wikipedia and Creative Commons some flexibility that's probably
very valuable for them.  They can tweak the licence if they think it's
necessary or if the Wikipedia community demands it.

But it creates some risks to the freedom of GFDL'd wiki'd works, and it's a
one-way relicensing that isn't being reciprocated by Creative Commons.  With
an endless timeline, this would be foolish and even dangerous, but by
limiting it to a 12 month period, the risk becomes pretty small.

...I think.
--

-- 
Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 477 36 44 19, http://ciaran.compsoc.com/

Support free software, join FSFE's Fellowship: http://fsfe.org

Recent blog entries:
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/status_of_fsfe_s_legal_dept_ftf
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/fsfe_s_antitrust_victory_with_samba
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/openstreetmap_considers_new_licence
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/why_european_software_patents_are_legally_invalid