[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] osm in flickr

80n 80n80n at gmail.com
Tue Aug 12 20:07:12 BST 2008


On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 6:55 PM, <simon at mungewell.org> wrote:

>
>
> >> From:
> >> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/
> >> --
> >> A new version of this license is available. You should use it for new
> >> works, and you may want to relicense existing works under it. No works
> >> are
> >> automatically put under the new license, however.
> >> --
> >>
> >
>
> This is direct from the CC site, and implies that they do not believe that
> there is an automatic upgrade from 2.0 to 3.0
>

Well, they (Yahoo!) haven't automatically upgraded it.  They have taken our
CC-BY-SA 2.0 licensed work and manually republished it under a new, but
compatible license.  It is their copy that is licensed under 3.0, ours is
still 2.0.  The 2.0 license allows them to do this.

What nobody can do is wave a magic wand and say that all copies are now
CC-BY-SA 3.0.  That's what I believe CC mean by  saying that there is no
automatic upgrade.

Best switch this thread to legal-talk, if you want to discuss further.
80n



>
> Cheers,
> Mungewell.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20080812/ec8d359f/attachment.html>


More information about the legal-talk mailing list