Creative Commons Sharealike Vs. GPL (Game data)

[Baker]

Is there really a true difference between between Creative Commons Sharealike With Attribution and the GPL for the purposes of game media or other non-source code media/assets[/color]?

I'm not talking license compatibility, they are incompatible. I'm talking about the application of the license in regards to game media/assets.

Under the GPL, anyone would be able to use it. Copyright still exists, so proper use would STILL require credits (attribution). Only public domain doesn't require credits (right? or does the GPL not always require them?).

Under the Creative Commons Sharealiike with Attribution, anyone would be able to use it and it requires attribution.

Or is there a hidden curve or problem somewhere?

I ask mostly because Wikipedia switched from the GDFL to the Creative Commons Sharealike with Attribution license.

Again, I'm not talking source code here or saying the licenses are compatible. They aren't. And in some cases, game media doesn't really have source code so to some degree GPL usage seems strange. None of this should be interpreted that I actually favor something over the GPL; I don't. My angle is availability of a wide body of media since there seems to be a lot of Creative Commons sharealike media out there.

[MauveBib]

Does creative commons not disallow commercial use, unlike the GPL?

[Baker]

[mankrip]

[Baker]