Archive:Should we permit or disallow commercial use of CZ-originated articles?: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
imported>Larry Sanger No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
== The issue explained neutrally == | == The issue explained neutrally == | ||
At issue is whether we | At issue is the question whether those who use | ||
More particularly, should we use [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/ CC-by-nc,] on the one hand, or [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ CC-by-sa] or [http://www.gnu.org/licenses/fdl.html GFDL,] on the other, for articles that are not required to be licensed otherwise? For those articles that began life on Wikipedia, we are required to use the GFDL. For articles that make no use of Wikipedia content, we need not use the GFDL. | |||
Revision as of 11:16, 23 March 2007
Policy argument summary started March 23, 2007
The issue explained neutrally
At issue is the question whether those who use
More particularly, should we use CC-by-nc, on the one hand, or CC-by-sa or GFDL, on the other, for articles that are not required to be licensed otherwise? For those articles that began life on Wikipedia, we are required to use the GFDL. For articles that make no use of Wikipedia content, we need not use the GFDL.