2009/2/27 Philipp Klaus Krause <p...@spth.de>: > It's sad to see OSM add to the pile of incompatible "share-alike" > licenses, making it more and more impossible to create free works > derived from more than one already existing free work. > > While I have to accept, that you do not want to go with a more PD or > BSD-like license, I would have at least hoped for some explicit > conversion clauses, e.g. allowing to use the data under CC-SA, GFDL or GPL.
If I undestand correctly, such a clause would also let us just ask people to license their contributions under ODbL instead of "temporarily dual-license under ODbL and CC-BY-SA". What I don't understand very clearly (and would appreciate a clarification) is the license says that ODbL applies to the database and not to the data in it, and that data in one databse can be covered by multiple licenses. What license would our data be under? Would it be under no license because it's factual data that cannot be copyrighted? In this case couldn't we just keep claiming that the data is under CC-BY-SA and remain compatible with other projects (even if this doesn't make a difference legally in most countries, because it's factual data) Cheers _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
