On 2018-01-28 04:21 PM, Matthew Darwin wrote: > > Here is the licence (Federal): > http://open.canada.ca/en/open-government-licence-canada
Here are some of the problems with that licence, in as many other people's word's as possible: * Like the OGL-UK, it doesn't deal with third-party rights. This is a problem: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2016-September/008541.html * Unlike the OGL-UK, the TB licence doesn't have a compatibility clause. The UK licence includes this clause: > “These terms are compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution > License 4.0 and the Open Data Commons Attribution License, both of > which license copyright and database rights. This means that when the > Information is adapted and licensed under either of those licences, > you automatically satisfy the conditions of the OGL when you comply > with the other licence. The OGLv3.0 is Open Definition compliant.” The Canadian licence gives no such assurance. * Unlike the OGL-UK, the licence doesn't cover the whole public sector. This from personal communication from Simon Poole of the OSM Foundation's legal team from March 2017: >> [The Ontario and Toronto licences] illustrate why we didn't want >> to make a blanket statement wrt OGL licence variants in CA and why >> in general the situation is a bit of a mess. It's also worth playing with CLIPOL - http://clipol.org/ - to see how badly myriad open data licences work together. _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca