[Wikipedia-l] Public Library of Science GFDL Compatible

Thu Oct 30 11:15:34 UTC 2003

Andre Engels wrote:

>I'd love it if someone proved me wrong, and either showed that there is a
>loophole (intended or unintended) that can be used and/or could get the
>"those licenses require basically the same things but in different wording,
>so no harm is done by cross-licensing" argument into something that would
>be juridically valid.
>  
>
Well, if they require the exact same things, then it should be valid, 
because if you fulfill the terms of one license, you fulfill the terms 
of them both.  Thus, if you fulfill the terms of the GFDL, and they're 
the same terms, nobody can sue you for copyright infringement, because 
you can't help but have fulfilled the terms of the CC license as well.  
This is what allows people to take BSD-licensed code, add additional 
restrictions to it, and use it in GPL code: if you follow the GPL, 
you're of necessity following all the BSD's requirements, so you're not 
violating it.

In this case though it seems perhaps there might be a technical 
violation relating to the requirement to link to the text of the CC 
license, which the GFDL obviously doesn't require.

-Mark