What license should I use for my website's content?

[Viva]

I'm working on a FOSS related website and I've been thinking about licensing all the content(not the back-end) under an open license. Should I use GFDL or a creative commons license or just GPL?

[.Maleficus.]

I'd go with one of the Creative Commons liscenses. You can keep the content free but still require credit if it's used somewhere else (I don't know if the others have anything like that).

[DeadSuperHero]

CC-BY-SA is my personal favorite, maybe it'll help you out. I believe that's also what Wikipedia is using nowadays.

[dragos240]

Use the
WTFPL

License.

[MikeTheC]

You should get a fish license. Failing that, perhqps a cat license.

[kevdog]

Use the
WTFPL

License.

What does the P and L stand for?

[Tibuda]

What does the P and L stand for?

"Public License" ?

[Grenage]

I also like the CC license, it's a nice system.

[AllRadioisDead]

What does the P and L stand for?
http://sam.zoy.org/wtfpl/

[t0p]

What does the P and L stand for?

Well, it clearly doesn't stand for "Google Is Your Friend".

As regards the OP: I also say go with a creative commons license. They have licenses of varying free-ness, so you can choose one that suits the particular content you're licensing. For instance, you might feel that your photographs should have a different kind of protection compared to your tutorial on setting up fluxbox on jaunty. You should be able to find creative commons licenses to suit each example.

[lukjad]

I'm working on a FOSS related website and I've been thinking about licensing all the content(not the back-end) under an open license. Should I use GFDL or a creative commons license or just GPL?

Take this quiz (http://creativecommons.org/choose/) to decide which license is best for you. I like this one, but you might choose another one:

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/)