<html><head></head><body>From my perspective - <br><br>"makes available the text of this agreement with the shared Data."<br><br><div>is why you can't use it for OSM - I think practical reasons is why this won't work..</div><div><br></div><div>Just my 5 cents to the matter<br></div><br><br><div><strong>
From:
</strong>
Cj Malone <CjMalone@mail.com>
<br>
<strong>
To:
</strong>
<legal-talk@openstreetmap.org>
<br>
<strong>
Sent:
</strong>
21/03/2022 21:19
<br>
<strong>
Subject:
</strong>
[OSM-legal-talk] Community Data License Agreement - Permissive - Version 2.0
<br><br><blockquote class="mori" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px solid #CCC;padding-left:1ex;">Hello,
<br>
<br>I was wondering if anyone had read the CDLA Permissive 2.0 [1], and
<br>checked for compatibility with the ODbL. I think it looks OK, but
<br>IANAL.
<br>
<br>I've seen there was a review of the CDLA Permissive 1.0 [2], which
<br>seems to have come to a conclusion of "maybe". But CDLA Permissive 2.0
<br>is a much sorter and simpler license.
<br>
<br>Any opinions?
<br>
<br>Cj
<br>
<br>[1] https://cdla.dev/permissive-2-0/
<br>[2] https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/CDLA_permissive_compatibility
<br>
<br>
<br>_______________________________________________
<br>legal-talk mailing list
<br>legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
<br>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
<br></blockquote></div></body></html>