> > the internal debates of others should not matter less. As I understand > > what is being said they will still be able to import from WMF projects; > > For a limited time - until some bit of cc-sa material is incorporated > into a given article.
They'll still be able to incorporate any of the GFDL or dual licensed material, which is all that really matters since if they want to copy the *entire* article and not some specific part, there's nothing from their site to relicense anyway. I'm worried about small sites that want intercompatibility with WMF > projects (which are the gorilla in the room), and larger ones whose > communities expect this to be a standing option. In terms of raw > content, the fraction of new material that is imported from sites that > aren't already considering switching is small. But we have a certain > obligation to act as stewards for the free sharing of knowledge, in a > networked community that we have helped to build, including thousands > of groups who we don't directly see on Wikipedia but who have made > choices based on ours in the past. The WMF should have thought about that before making the switch, though. Instead the official line was that this switch was a panacea, and any suggestion that there were legal problems surrounding it which acted against the free sharing of knowledge was dismissed as FUD. Short of a miracle, it's too late to fix it, though. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
