Steve, > For now, as Jordan is an actual lawyer, I'm going to continue voting > ODL.
Jordan said, in a recent response to one of my posts and comparing ODL to a PD-type license: "I personally am neutral on a preference between the two and think that it would be wholly inappropriate for me to recommend one or the other to OSM. I think that anyone wanting to use one of the approaches should pick the one that best suits their needs." So while he crafted ODL and thinks it would work, he doesn't actually recommend anything, saying basically that we should know best what's good for us. I have the impression that we don't know best what is good for us and thus I am very happy for input from the outside, especially input that recommends something. (We can then discuss whether we find that recommendation stupid or not.) The bone of contention seems to be the database law. Jordan hints at this with "To not use an available legal tool to accomplish a certain goal (share alike for data) doesn't make sense to me", and about the situation in the US (where the license relies on contract) he says: "How enforceable it is, is one of the questions we'd hoped would be addressed by feedback in the beta stage.", whereas John seems to be convinced that it won't work: "Unlike the copyright on a song, which travels along with the song no matter what, the share-alike is restricted to the parties of the contract." I don't think it is fair to dismiss John's statement the way you do. And I fail to see why the amount of money the CC may or may not have has anything to do with it. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00.09' E008°23.33' _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-talk
