W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > June 2009

AW: Wikipedia relicensed: consequences for DBpedia and downstream?

From: Chris Bizer <chris@bizer.de>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 09:58:31 +0200
To: "'Dan Brickley'" <danbri@danbri.org>, <public-lod@w3.org>
Message-ID: <00f001c9ee58$3e162060$ba426120$@de>
Hi Dan,

we will dual-license the next DBpedia release under CC-BY-SA and GFDL.

We would even be willing go for a more liberal license (for instance CC-BY),
I anybody with a legal background would assure us that we are allowed to do
so under US and European law.



-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: public-lod-request@w3.org [mailto:public-lod-request@w3.org] Im Auftrag
von Dan Brickley
Gesendet: Dienstag, 16. Juni 2009 09:38
An: public-lod@w3.org
Betreff: Wikipedia relicensed: consequences for DBpedia and downstream?

As per the licensing update vote result and subsequent Wikimedia 
Foundation Board resolution, any content on Wikimedia Foundation 
projects currently available under GFDL 1.2 with the possibility of 
upgrading to a later version will be made available additionally under 
Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike 3.0 Unported.

Specifically with regard to text, after this update, only dual-licensed 
content or CC-BY-SA-compatible content can be added to the projects, and 
GFDL-only submissions will no longer be accepted. In other words, 
CC-BY-SA will be the primary Wikimedia license for text, and GFDL will 
be retained as a secondary license.

According to http://wiki.dbpedia.org/Datasets#h18-18 DBpedia is 
available under 

Will it also be made available under 
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ ? ("Attribution-Share 
Alike 3.0 Unported")

What do these distinctions mean in practice when we're dealing with 
mergable data rather than documents?

"Share Alike — If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may 
distribute the resulting work only under the same, similar or a 
compatible license."

... seems rather strong (eg. for intranet triplestore use).

Is anyone here not not a lawyer?


Received on Tuesday, 16 June 2009 07:59:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:15:57 UTC