Regarding the Wikipedia license change ...... It is my belief that after they make their change, Wikinews will be able to cut and paste passages from Wikipedia.Is my assumption correct or false?It would be helpful in quickly creating background information for articles and eliminates one place we have to look for copyvios.SVTCobra----- Original Message -----From: Jon Davis Date: Monday, March 2, 2009 1:37 amSubject: Re: [Wikinews-l] License change?To: Wikinews mailing list > Yea. Forgive me. For some reason I had the wild ass notion that > the old> articles were GFDL. I really don't know where that came from.> > -Jon> > On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 22:18, Ilya Haykinson > wrote:> > > I agree with Bawolff on this one. The license change is mainly a> > problem for GFDL wikis, which suffer from some problems with> > attribution and reuse in CC-licensed projects as a result of their> > license. We do not have this issue, and don't really need to change.> > Even if we wanted to, we would face an uphill battle in making our> > license more restrictive retroactively. Unless there's an overriding> > reason to do so, I'd elect to retain our more-free license in place.> > Goodness knows, we don't need _more_ restrictions on reuse of > Wikinews> content ;-)> >> > -ilya> >> > On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:04 PM, bawolff > >> wrote:> > > From my understanding, wmf wants to change the lices from > gfdl to> > > cc-by-sa-(3? not sure on version) which is quite different > than cc-by> > > (similar to the difference between GPL and BSD from my > understanding).> > We also don't really have the ability to > arbitrary change license (we> > > could say something like from this day forward, everything > is blah> > > license, but thats messy).> > >> > > Anyways, i think our license is pretty good. Many people > feel that> > > modifying wikinews content without allowing redistribution > is a> > > perfectly good use of our content, which a change in license would> > > disallow.> > >> > > --> > > - bawolff> > >> > > p.s. everything before sep 05 is PD, not GFDL. We currently > have only> > > a single gfdl article in all of wikinews (not counting help > ns +> > > images)> > >> > >> > >> > > On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:47 PM, Jon Davis > wrote:> > >> I realize we all _love_ a conversation about changing > licenses... but> > here I> > >> go.> > >>> > >> The WMF has been disusing the change of WP from GFDL to CC-> BY (since> > that is> > >> now allowed for a short period of time). Since everything > newer than> > Sept> > >> 05 on en.wn is CC-BY-2.5 (and everything older than that is > GFDL)... why> > >> can't we "upgrade" all the old articles to CC-BY also? I > realize we> > don't> > >> "need" to do it, as the old articles are of little interest > to most> > people,> > >> but we have the opportunity... shouldn't we take it?> > >>> > >> -Jon> > >> [[User:ShakataGaNai]]> > >>> > >> --> > >> This is a test of the emergency sig system.> > >>> > >> _______________________________________________> > >> Wikinews-l mailing list> > >> [email protected]> > >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l> > >>> > >>> > >> > > _______________________________________________> > > Wikinews-l mailing list> > > [email protected]> > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l> > >> >> > _______________________________________________> > Wikinews-l mailing list> > [email protected]> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l> >> > > > -- > This is a test of the emergency sig system.> > Oh, and the following location only accurate +/- 100 miles. So > if you're> coming to get me, better send a nuke.> Sent from: Sunnyvale CA United States.>
_______________________________________________ Wikinews-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikinews-l
