<HTML>
<FONT FACE="MS Shell Dlg" DEFAULT="FACE"><FONT SIZE="1" POINTSIZE="8" DEFAULT="SIZE">"a clear piece of evidence that getting Au data licensed for ODbL is going to<BR>
be like pushing excreta uphill":<BR>
<BR>
Not necessarily so.<BR>
<BR>
IANAL but it appears "in principle" CC-BY data will be compatible with OdbL. I've just has a chat with someone involved with architecting GILF, where I received this informal opinion. The Australian Government's intention is actually now to make its data as "free" as possible. The gov2.0 taskforce report supports this. CC-BY is the free-est licence available consistent with Australian Copyright law (i.e. CC0 doesn't make sense in the Australian context apparently, but some loophole allows you to attribute your CC-BY data as null).<BR>
<BR>
Apparently NPTM is a special case because its data ownership was, er, subject to poor recordkeeping. So better to have it available in some format than none.<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
Brendan<BR>
<BR>
p.s. I'm surprised OdbL is not called OdbL-BY-SA. What happens if somebody wants to make a non-SA version?<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
--Original Message Text---<BR>
<B>From:</B> Emilie Laffray<BR>
<B>Date:</B> Fri, 11 Dec 2009 11:16:15 +0000<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
2009/12/11 Liz <<FONT COLOR=0000ff><U>edodd@billiau.net<FONT COLOR=000000 DEFAULT="COLOR"></U>><BR>
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009, Alex (Maxious) Sadleir wrote:<BR>
> The long awaited National Public Toilet Map has been released in XML<BR>
> (but not under CC-BY like many reports recommended) @<BR>
> <FONT COLOR=0000ff><U>http://data.australia.gov.au/610<FONT COLOR=000000 DEFAULT="COLOR"></U><BR>
><BR>
> Instead, it's a click through licence that amongst other Proprietary<BR>
> terms requires anybody with database access to accept these terms<BR>
> again (but viewing generated map tiles is okay):<BR>
> "3.2 You may not sublicense your rights under these Terms to any<BR>
> person. If you require another person to access the Database for the<BR>
> Permitted Purpose (including a person you engage to design or build a<BR>
> Derivative Product on your behalf), that person must obtain a copy of<BR>
> the Database from the <FONT COLOR=0000ff><U>www.australia.gov.au<FONT COLOR=000000 DEFAULT="COLOR"></U> website and comply with the<BR>
> Terms of this licence."<BR>
><BR>
> Two steps forward, one step back.<BR>
> - Alex<BR>
><BR>
<BR>
a clear piece of evidence that getting Au data licensed for ODbL is going to<BR>
be like pushing excreta uphill<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
I may be reading it wrong, but getting the data to work with cc-by-sa would not be possible either. Essentially, with OSM, you are doing sublicensing all the time due to the way it is working. But I could be understanding wrongly. In the case of Google, since they don't give you access to the database, it doesn't matter.<BR>
I don't think it is here an odbl problem.<BR>
<BR>
Emilie Laffray<BR>
<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>