On Thu, Sep 2, 2010 at 4:40 AM, Rob Myers <r...@robmyers.org> wrote: > On 09/02/2010 05:09 AM, Eric Jarvies wrote: >> >> On Sep 1, 2010, at 9:55 AM, Anthony wrote: >> >>> >>> If ODbL were CC-BY-SA for databases, I'd be in favor of it. >> >> +1 > > ODbL *is* share-alike for databases, with attribution. > > What it isn't is share-alike for produced works.
And what it also isn't, is CC-BY-SA for databases. Because it is not share-alike for produced works, and because it requires distribution of source along with distribution of produced works. > Even BY-SA doesn't cover absolutely everything it touches. Correct. But irrelevant. > Making mash-ups easier and not excluding incompatible data sources in what > are now called produced works has always been a strong goal of the OSM > community that I've encountered. So you want to change the license (not just a flaw in the license, but an intentional feature of it). Fine, go ahead, just be honest about what you're doing. _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
