[Foundation-l] Third-party GFDL text irrevocably incompatible with Wikipedia as of August 1

Fri May 29 20:07:12 UTC 2009

On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 3:52 PM, geni <geniice at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2009/5/29 Anthony <wikimail at inbox.org>:
> > I'm not sure where you get the "no" from.  The relicensing was done for
> the
> > sake of third parties, not for "Wikipedia sites".
>
> It's means that even if your arguments about wikimedia not following
> the GFDL had any validity (of course they don't as has been explained
> to you many times) it would not cause any problems with the switch to
> the GFDL.

My comment was that "the success of your 'relicensing' relies on the claim
that you're following it".  In other words, the only reason you claim to be
able to relicense content under CC-BY-SA is because you claim the GFDL
allows you to do that (it doesn't actually say that this can be done, but
apparently you claim that "republish" means the same as "relicense").