<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>