On 15/03/2014, Tobias Knerr <o...@tobias-knerr.de> wrote: > On 14.03.2014 23:21, moltonel 3x Combo wrote: >> There's one fairly obvious to me : the share-alike requirement is >> necessary to enforce the attribution requirement (otherwise any user >> could just change the license to one that doesn't require >> attribution). > > It would not be legal for them to get rid of the attribution like that. > Attribution requirements can exist without share-alike, see e.g. CC-BY.
I know it sounds like a glaring loophole that ought to be illegal, but I have yet to see a paragraph of CC-BY that prevents me to : * Use the CC-BY material to create an adapted work * Release the adapted work as PD with attribution (using PD because I'm not allowed to place additional restrictions) * Use the PD material to create a private work. Of course you expect that in that process, only an insubstancial part of the original CC-BY material would be left. But "insubstancial" isn't legaly defined, so an unscrupulous user could get unrestricted access to a lot of data this way and still stand enough of a chance in court that nobody would bother attacking (especially considering the fact that CC-BY licensors probably do not care as much as CC-BY-SA licensors). _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk