Steve wrote:
John I would assert that you're more worried about perceived
competition for your licenses
JTW says:
If this were the case, we'd have taken in the ODbL, or we'd have written
something like it. With CC's position in the licensing space it'd have
been quickly adopted - people
discussions.
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL comments from Creative Commons
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 6:37 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On 25 Mar 2009, at 11:34, Andy Allan wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 5:36 PM, SteveC st...@asklater.com wrote:
On 22 Mar 2009, at 06:08, 80n wrote
SteveC wrote:
No I think there are some substantial issues, but they're inflated
because of the PoV.
I didn't have a chance to get to Science Commons while I was in Boston
last week but I did talk to various people who are Smarter Than Me (tm)
from the FSF and CC and none of them supported
Ulf Möller wrote:
Thinh Nguyen of Creative Commons has posted detailed comments on
the ODbL on the co-ment website.
Though I have a lot of time for CC in general, and agree with their general
stance that PD is the ideal way to go, I don't really find that a very
useful response.
I count 20
On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 12:39:01AM +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote:
What I wanted to say was that, to a certain degree, *any* certainty is
better than a random assortment of may, might, the project
consensus seems to be that..., i am not a lawyer but..., depending
on your jurisdiction, and
Thinh Nguyen of Creative Commons writes:
While some complexities are introduced by differences in background legal
doctrines, others are introduced by the ODbL scheme itself.
These two points about the complexity of the ODbL are important ones that
probably haven't been discussed as much as
Thinh Nguyen of Creative Commons has posted detailed comments on the
ODbL on the co-ment website.
That site isn't really suitable for longer texts, so I have copied it to
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ODbL_comments_from_Creative_Commons
___
