Commons talk:GNU Free Documentation License

A summay that is easy to understand?

How about a summary that explains this license in a few simple sentences for a new user? Waqas.usman 01:55, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

See w:GNU Free Documentation License for an encyclopedia article about the license. User:dbenbenn 04:12, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Question regarding GNU free documentation license and photographs/images

When the GNU free documentation license is evoked in relation to photographs/images, must the text of the license be distributed with each copy of the photograph/image?

Example: I'd like to download a photograph of Franz Schubert's grave for possible reproduction in a concert program book: Am I asked to reproduce the text of the GNU free documentation license within each concert program book?

Thanks for any input on this.

The GFDL is not practical for photos and short texts, especially for printed media, because it demands that they be published along with the full text of the license. You should use an image which is licensed under a Creative Commons License or public domain. --GeorgHH 18:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Why on earth is this license even applied to photographs, then? 68.145.151.146 20:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure. But if you do wan photographs of Franz Schubert's grave under a different license, email this person for permission --Anonymous101 12:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Interwiki

{{editprotected}}

Please add the interwiki link [[ar:ويكيبيديا:نص رخصة جنو للوثائق الحرة]]. --Meno25 22:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done --GeorgHH 18:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

{{editprotected}} Please add the interwiki link [[ksh:GNU Lizännz för n fräije Dokementazjon]]. --Purodha Blissenbach (talk) 13:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Done. Killiondude (talk) 18:46, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Update GFDL Version 1.3

A new Version of GFDL has been released. Now ist valid 1.3. Please take care for changes. We should Update now. see http://www.fsf.org/news/fdl-1.3-pr.html JARU (talk) 11:32, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

If this is updated to 1.3, a copy of the 1.2 text should be preserved elsewhere, and templates such as {{GFDL-1.2}} updated to point to that text instead. – Tivedshambo (talk) 10:04, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

There is no consensus to switch Commons to 1.3. MediaWiki:Copyrightwarning was changed to 1.3, but there was no consensus for that either. Superm401 - Talk 05:59, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Changeover

{{Editprotected-lu}}

Please move this page to Commons:GNU Free Documentation License, version 1.2 (or a similar title).

Please update this title's content to GFDL 1.3. See w:Wikipedia:Text of the GNU Free Documentation License for source.

Links to this page where version 1.2 is specifically intended (e.g. {{GFDL-1.2}}), will also need to be updated, I'll try to flag these individually if no one gets to them sooner.

Dragons flight (talk) 19:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

 Done. Thank you for your efforts. Kwj2772 (msg) 13:19, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Translation

I´ve seen lot of policies and templates are not translated to spanish and I begon to do it, but I see no language-template in this one. Is it possible to do it or is there any problem? Sugestions? --Andrea (talk) 01:49, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

I think that for this project page interwikis are enough.--Trixt (talk) 22:33, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Yes, interwikis were added after I made the request in the Village :) --Andrea (talk) 23:24, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Publish work derived from other work with this licence?

Hi, I have derived an image from MipMap Example STS101.jpg that I want to publish. I guess I have to chose "This file is not my own work", but then I don't know what to choose in the drop down lists. The things I can chose from are:

• The copyright holder published this work with the right Creative Commons license
• The copyright holder published their photo or video on Flickr with the right license
• The copyright has definitely expired
• This work was made by the United States government
• Miscellaneous reasons
• I don't know if any of the above choices apply or not! Help!

but neither of them applies. The work is published under GNU FDL which isn't a Creative Commons licence, it doesn't come from Flickr, it hasn't expired, it wasn't made by the US government and it isn't licensed under Free Artistic License which is the only choice I get under Miscellaneous reasons. If I select "I don't know if any of the above choices apply or not! Help!" I am not allowed to publish the work.

If I select that I am the author, I can only choose to publish it under Creative Commons licenses or release it to the public domain! I have to publish it under the same license as before, which is GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or later. So how do I do? —Kri (talk) 23:30, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

You can use Special:Upload (or click "Back to the old form" on top of Special:UploadWizard). Than do not pick up any license in the drop down menu but add one to the file description. --Jarekt (talk) 04:27, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll try that. —Kri (talk) 11:34, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

When I added the file in the old upload wizard, it said that the file had the license "Cc-by-sa-3.0-migrated-with-disclaimers, GFDL-en". Does this mean that files with license GNU Free Documentation License v. 1.2 or later can just be re-uploaded with the license "Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0"? —Kri (talk) 11:46, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

I assume we are talking about File:MipMap Example STS101 Anisotropic.png derived from File:MipMap Example STS101.jpg which was derived from thumbnail of File:ISS from Atlantis - Sts101-714-016.jpg. File:MipMap Example STS101.jpg uses {{GFDL-en|migration=relicense}} license and I think it is the simplest if you use the same exact string too. Other possibility is to recreate your image based on hi-resolution original. That way you will have much clearer image and can use whatever license you want. --Jarekt (talk) 13:36, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I actually realized that I should have used the large original image when I ran in to this problem, but then I had put to much work in it already so I didn't feel like doing it again :P Thanks anyway. I also changed the license to {{GFDL-en|migration=relicense}}. —Kri (talk) 17:46, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Edit protected

{{Editprotected}} Please add after "See Commons:Licensing for more information on licensing issues here on Wikimedia Commons,", this text

"Especially, please, look at the related section for the restrictions that apply to the use of this license."

or something similar at your taste :)

Thanks--Pierpao.lo (listening) 12:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

 Support @Pierpao and Majora: the text from {{No more GFDL}} could be used. (includes a Dutch translation) - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 15:11, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

I added the line proposed by Pierpao. I'm not quite sure I want to add the template since this is an actual licensing page that would still have to be used for legacy material that is still licensed under the GFDL. --Majora (talk) 16:09, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

@Majora: I agree the template shouldn't be included (that was made for template documentation), but (part of) the text might have been reusable. But Pierpao's suggestion is actually also fine, so this can indeed be considered done. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 17:26, 31 January 2019 (UTC)