<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 14.03.2018 um 13:06 schrieb Jonathon
Rossi:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAGb9TQ+qyG+GBZ=Vc9GHvCmTVojm3zgMK5qx2j0T_Jo99LtbEw@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="ltr">...<br>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Could you please point me to a good resource that
explains why CC BY 2.5 and 3.0 don't have the same problem
with "technical protection measures" that we've got in the
waivers because I'm obviously missing something. I've read
the license texts and <a
href="https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/License_Versions#Application_of_effective_technological_measures_by_users_of_CC-licensed_works_prohibited"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/License_Versions#Application_of_effective_technological_measures_by_users_of_CC-licensed_works_prohibited</a>.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
...<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
There is no doubt that we have a moral and ethical obligation to
keep CC BY 2.X licensed data available free of restrictions, as the
licensors intended. The ODbL guarantees this via the parallel
distribution mechanism. But naturally it would be preferable if we
could get complete waivers for the CC BY 2.X datasets, sorry if I
came across as implying otherwise .<br>
<br>
Simon<br>
</body>
</html>