3 ms·
It's not exactly hidden when it's clearly stated in the license, and relatively common practice to omit that clause.
by pengaru 5y ago
It's not exactly hidden when it's clearly stated in the license, and relatively common practice to omit that clause.
- jfrunyon 5y agoI don't think most people expect the next version of the license to ... lead to a completely different license.
- bawolff 5y agoIts not totally different - cc-by-sa is pretty similar in spirit to gfdl with no cover text, non-derrivative sections etc. Of course practically speaking, being able to legally print out a wikipedia article without printing out the entire gfdl is a pretty big difference. To the point where i am aware of people licensing photos under gfdl to claim its open source while in practise its impossoble to reuse practically. I mean your point still stands that its weird to release a new license just for wikipedia.