On 6/17/11, Strainu <strain...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think that such a policy could not be fundamentally different in > other languages, since they all have the same license. However, the > wording could be improved, for instance by explaining WHY one cannot > consider himself as the owner of an article: by accepting the CC-BY-SA > license, one gives up a significant amount of the rights and control > offered by copyright laws. And this is not only from a legal POV, this > is also true from a common sense perspective: more people approaching > a problem often lead to better result than a single individual trying > to solve that problem.
To be honest, when you release your work under cc-by-sa you grant a third party the right to reuse a (small or large) part of your work to make a derivative work. The license in itself is not what determines that the live version of a Wikipedia article is the last one, this happens because of Wikipedia policies. And of course, your (old) version is not deleted from the article history apart from a few cases. The point is: Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia, if people don't accept this they can always publish somewhere else. Cruccone _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
