> On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 11:12 AM, Mathieu Stumpf wrote: > Unfortunately, this dictionary is under GPL which is a well known free > license (but a strange choice for a non-software project). So I would > like to know, can I mix up a GPL content with a CC-by-sa page (in cases > where such a page already exist), and more generaly can I add GPL > content into the wiktionary. No.
> If no, could we approach their community and ask them for a relicensing > under CC-by-sa, so we could add their great work into our wiktionaries. > I also send this message to email I found to contact them[2]. Sure, that would be great. On 23/02/13 11:51, Andre Engels wrote: > No. What you stumbled upon is a well-known (at least to me) problem of > share-alike licences: The only thing they are two-way compatible with > is themselves. Even if one would have a different license with exactly > the same meaning, it would not be possible to move texts from that > license to CC-BY-SA (or GPL or whatever) or vice versa. There are a few cases where sharealike licenses include provisions for compatible licenses. Sadly, the license owners don't seem too interested in advacing in that front. See for instance the list at http://creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses ...which is empty. _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l