Licence compliance with GFDL audio recordings?

David Gerard dgerard at
Mon Apr 21 22:36:34 UTC 2008

On 21/04/2008, Ben Finney <bignose+hates-spam at> wrote:

>  My advice would be to convince the copyright holder to re-license the
>  work under something more sane, like the GPL v2. That, at least,
>  doesn't require the license terms to be included in the redistributed
>  work.

We're talking about Wikipedia GFDL text, so that's not going to
happen. CC-by-sa compatibility is anticipated in the near future, and
GFDL 1.3 in the nearer future, so we could use "or later version" and
do a CC-by-sa shuffle. But not right away.

We already have spoken versions of Wikipedia articles on Wikipedia.
These would presumably be a copyright violation if not right there on
Wikipedia (which of course has the GFDL and complete article history
linked on every page) - so can't be used elsewhere. Argh.

Does running a Wikipedia article through Festival violate the
copyright if you record it? ARGH.

#include <gfdl-sucks-so-much.h>

- d.

More information about the Discussion mailing list