On 11/16/2010 10:08 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Rob Myers wrote:
As does OSM's existing CC-BY-SA 2.0 licence.
I believe such an upgrade path was how Wikipedia changed from GFDL to
CC-BY-SA, wasn't it? They got the makers of GFDL to release a newer
version of GFDL that would provide an upgrade window.
It was a different upgrade path from the one in BY-SA but basically yes.
BY-SA 2.0 and above state that you can relicence derivatives
(adaptations) under a later licence or a licence from a different
jurisdiction:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/legalcode
4.b: "You may distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or
publicly digitally perform a Derivative Work only under the terms of
this License, a later version of this License with the same License
Elements as this License, or a Creative Commons iCommons license that
contains the same License Elements as this License (e.g.
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Japan)"
With Wikipedia, the FSF released a special point version of the FDL that
would allow large wiki projects (hint, hint ;-) ) to vote to relicence
to BY-SA for a limited time period.
If Creative Commons had been more friendly towards the data licensing
issue, a similar window could have been opened in a hypothetical
Sure.
It might still be worth asking them about this if people haven't already.
- Rob.
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
