GFDL 1.3

[Ciaran O'Riordan]

Alex Hudson <home at alexhudson.com> writes:
> Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
>> Yes, but isn't this inevitable no matter how the change of licence is done?

> No, [...]
>
> In previous drafts I saw, there was an idea of being able to relicense 
> to a "GNU Wiki License" which would have presumably been CC-BY-SA 
> compatible without needing to relicense to that license[...]

> If that option had been open-ended[...]

It's possible that after trying, they decided that licence compatibility was
impossible.

I'm also not sure if licence compatibility can be open-ended.  If the
hypothetical GNU Wiki License was compatible with cc-by-sa-3.0, then the
window of compatibility would close when cc-by-sa was changed in an
incompatible way.  So there's an end either way, and dates are probably a
cleaner end because they're fixed and they don't create the inconvenience
that decisions to update cc-by-sa in good-but-incompatible ways now also
invoke this end of compatibility.


-- 
Ciarán O'Riordan, +32 477 36 44 19, http://ciaran.compsoc.com/

Support free software, join FSFE's Fellowship: http://fsfe.org

Recent blog entries:
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/status_of_fsfe_s_legal_dept_ftf
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/fsfe_s_antitrust_victory_with_samba
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/openstreetmap_considers_new_licence
http://fsfe.org/fellows/ciaran/ciaran_s_free_software_notes/why_european_software_patents_are_legally_invalid