I would be inclined to believe that excerpting small parts of text would not attach GFDL, in the same way that the Signpost can, for example, excerpt parts of mailing list conversations that haven't been licensed for on-wiki use. For now, I think we can leave it up, with the understanding that image licensing details can be worked out at another time.
Ral315 (
talk)
21:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I think when the entire illustration depends on (and includes) the GFDL text, a derivative work is formed. I also just think it's respectful to the authors to keep the same license.
Superm401 -
Talk00:37, 25 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Link to article
It'd be nice to include a link to the article which each week's cartoon was drawn from. Could just be at the end of the text blurb at the top. --
CBD13:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I would be inclined to believe that excerpting small parts of text would not attach GFDL, in the same way that the Signpost can, for example, excerpt parts of mailing list conversations that haven't been licensed for on-wiki use. For now, I think we can leave it up, with the understanding that image licensing details can be worked out at another time.
Ral315 (
talk)
21:03, 19 December 2006 (UTC)reply
I think when the entire illustration depends on (and includes) the GFDL text, a derivative work is formed. I also just think it's respectful to the authors to keep the same license.
Superm401 -
Talk00:37, 25 December 2006 (UTC)reply
Link to article
It'd be nice to include a link to the article which each week's cartoon was drawn from. Could just be at the end of the text blurb at the top. --
CBD13:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)reply