Hot answers tagged

16

You are correct that re-licensing virtually always requires the permission of the copyright holder. This was a rather exceptional case. All material on Wikipedia used to be under the license GFDL v1.2, or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. The next version released by the FSF, GFDL v1.3, contained a provision that allowed any ...


5

The GFDL is mostly intended for books or larger written documents like manuals – it is literally a Free Documentation License. The license has unique provisions like that some sections can be marked as non-modifiable, or that certain attributions have to be shown on the cover of a book. All of this is difficult or impossible to apply to an infographic. In ...


4

For simplicity's sake, let's assume that Wiktionary is licensed under CC-BY-SA 3.0, rather than also accounting for the GFDL dual-license. The CC-BY-SA license does not prevent you from selling the original work, selling adaptations (derivative works), or selling collections that include the work. So you are generally fine. However, you must license the ...


4

You hold the copyright to your works, and can issue licenses. A license can either be exclusive or non-exclusive, but for each sub-right of copyright you cannot grant an exclusive and non-exclusive license at the same time. Multiple non-exclusive licenses can co-exist. You have granted licenses under the terms of the CC-BY-SA 3.0 and the GFDL. These ...


3

From the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 legal code (version 4.0 has similar wording): You may Distribute or Publicly Perform an Adaptation only under the terms of:...(iv) a Creative Commons Compatible License. "Creative Commons Compatible License" means a license that is listed at https://creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses that ...


2

Your database content is definitely a "derived work" of Wikitionary and needs to be licensed under CC-BY-SA and/or GFDL (you can choose to use only one of them). Your database structure (which tables you have in the database) is most likely not a "derived work" of Wikitionary, unless you specifically re-used the data structures from Wikitionary (which is ...


2

Almost every section of the GFDL has something prohibiting this. 2. Verbatim Copying You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncommercially, provided that...you add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this License. Which you plan to do in your proprietary work. 1. Applicability and Definitions ...


1

The GFDL was written with books or multi-page documents in mind. It contains many provisions that are cumbersome for non-written works or short written works. It is historically relevant because it is a non-software copyleft license that predates the Creative Commons Share Alice license. In nearly all circumstances you will want to choose the CC-BY-SA ...


1

This scenario is not entirely clear. (1) Regarding the license of Wiki A, “GNU FDL 1.3 unless otherwise noted”: This seems to be an outbound license, but they may have a different inbound license, i.e. a different license under which that Wiki accepts contributions. For example, they might require all new contributions to be available under the FDL, but use ...


1

I don't think the GPL is affected. To “convey” a work means any kind of propagation that enables other parties to make or receive copies. So I'd say you convey the source by placing it on a web server and allowing others to obtain it from there. Individuals downloading it do not convey the source themselves, nor is each such transfer to be seen as a ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible