Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
If people choose GFDL, it's pretty bloody obvious (to me) that the relaxed CC-BY-SA license isn't what they wanted.
This is a non-issue for Wikipedia because each contributor owns their contributions - not the Wikimedia Foundation. There can be no hostile change of licence there.
What does copyright ownership have to do with the point I raised?
Are you seriously saying that someone can't now arbitrarily relicense Wikipedia content as CC-BY-SA?
Cheers,
Alex.