<p>My point was, I thought there are many more open licenses than listed in the picture.</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Sep 3, 2012 10:47 AM, "Paul Norman" <<a href="mailto:penorman@mac.com">penorman@mac.com</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Non-commercial only licenses discriminate against fields of endeavor and are definitely not open. See 6 of </span><a href="http://opensource.org/docs/osd" target="_blank">http://opensource.org/docs/osd</a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"> or 8 of </span><a href="http://opendefinition.org/okd/" target="_blank">http://opendefinition.org/okd/</a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">. No derivative licenses are also not open – you can’t modify the data.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">Another explanation is </span><a href="http://freedomdefined.org/Permissible_restrictions#Restrictions_which_are_not_permissible" target="_blank">http://freedomdefined.org/Permissible_restrictions#Restrictions_which_are_not_permissible</a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d">. CC doesn’t claim that any NC or ND license is open either.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p><div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div><div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in"><p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> Pavel Melnikov [mailto:<a href="mailto:positron96@gmail.com" target="_blank">positron96@gmail.com</a>] <br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, September 02, 2012 8:31 PM<br><b>To:</b> Simone Aliprandi<br><b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [OSM-talk] opendata diagram<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div></div><p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p><p>Forgive my incompetence, but what about other open licenses? Say, CC-non-commercial, Cc-no-derivatives, and a whole bunch of combinations of by, sa, nc, nd? Em you consider them not-open? <br>
I'm sure there are more examples, I only know about cc ones.<u></u><u></u></p><div><p class="MsoNormal">On Sep 3, 2012 3:04 AM, "Simone Aliprandi" <<a href="mailto:simone.aliprandi@gmail.com" target="_blank">simone.aliprandi@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I realized a diagram including all the most important opendata<br>licenses that are now available, and classifying them according to<br>their legal effects (attribution and share-alike, attribution only,<br>
public domain). I hope this work can be useful to better understand<br>the actual situation of geodata (open)licensing:<br><a href="http://aliprandi.blogspot.it/2012/05/opendata-graph.html" target="_blank">http://aliprandi.blogspot.it/2012/05/opendata-graph.html</a><br>
Bye,<br>--<br>Simone Aliprandi - <a href="http://www.aliprandi.org" target="_blank">http://www.aliprandi.org</a><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>talk mailing list<br><a href="mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk" target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk</a><u></u><u></u></p></div></div></div></div></blockquote></div>