<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 14 August 2010 10:14, Francis Davey <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:fjmd1a@gmail.com">fjmd1a@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On 14 August 2010 10:09, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer <<a href="mailto:dieterdreist@gmail.com">dieterdreist@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> I might miss the point: but why do some governments put their data<br>
> under cc-by or cc-by-sa licenses if those are not suitable for data<br>
> but only for works?<br>
<br>
</div>There may be institutional reasons for it (eg "we always use this licence").<br>
<br>
<br></blockquote><div>It seems to me that use of these licenses by governments started about the time osm decided they were no good and continues to accelerate. I also find it very odd that this project with extremely limited legal resources feels like it knows better than the large legal teams that governments and state bodies have.<br>
<br>If governments release large amounts of data under these licenses and they turn out to not offer the correct protection then wouldn't they just change the law so they do work?<br><br>Kevin <br></div></div>