[Foundation-l] Re: license evolution

Sun May 22 05:50:27 UTC 2005

2005/5/22, Ray Saintonge <saintonge at telus.net>:
> I noticed that clause with some  concern quite some time ago, though I
> didn't comment on it.  Article 10 of the licence deals with furute
> revisions, and at first glance appears to deal with the point.
> Nevertheless, even there I am not completely comfortable with it.  The
> article appears to give people a choice about which version whould
> apply.  That's fine when you're dealing with the handful of articles
> that a person might put onto his personal website, but it creates
> potential complications when many users are involved.  A person who
> contributes today may not like a GFDL version that appears five years
> later when he (or his heirs) are no longer reachable.

<snip />

> Ec

But just because it is avaliable under the next version, doesnt mean
it stops being avaliable under the older one. In other words, if i
license something under GFDL 1.0, and then in GFDL 2.0 they say
no-comercial use (which they wont, but that is not the point), it is
still avaliable under 1.0 so that it will forever be able to be used
for commerical purposes. In other words, only changes to make the
information more free would have a real effect.

paz y amor,
-rjs

-- 
hit me: <robin.shannon.id.au>
jab me: <robin.shannon at jabber.org.au>

This work is released into the public domain.
<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain>