[OSM-legal-talk] ODbL modules?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Andrew Turner wrote:
> One thing that has made Creative Commons incredibly successful is the
> modularity of the various components: Attribution, Share-Alike,
> Non-Commercial, etc.

Yes, I find it incredibly useful to effectively have 10 different 
licenses that somehow all sound as if they are one family but on closer 
inspection aren't compatible.

> And anyone that may want
> to apply a different license to their particular data will be forced
> to create a whole new license, a large economic and social cost

They can just copy the license and strike out the words they don't like. 
At least that way users aren't fooled into thinking that they could 
somehow use "ODbL-SA" data in an "ODbL-NC" project, or "ODbL-NC" data in 
an "ODbL-SA" project, or "ODbL-SA" data in an "ODbL-BY" project, or 
"ODbL-NC" data in an "ODbL-BY" project, or ...

> In addition, the combination of data under these various licenses can
> be more clearly, and early, determined so it's possible to pull in,
> say, ODbL-Attribution into ODbL-ShareAlike-Attribution. This would
> greatly help the OSM effort of pulling in other datasets, or others
> knowing how they can use OSM data in their own.

In my eyes this modular nonsense is actually the greatest problem with 
the CC licenses and I'm happy not to see it repeated here.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"