[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] ODbL vs CC-by-SA pros and cons

[Rob Myers]

On 08/30/2010 12:09 PM, John Smith wrote:
> On 30 August 2010 20:59, Rob Myers<rob at robmyers.org>  wrote:
>> That isn't a valid comparison. The ODbL is not a BSD-style licence.
>
> *If* we were simply being asked about a change of license you'd have a
> valid argument, but we're not, the CTs are very open ended with a very
> low barrier for change to occur.
>
> We can't just agree to the ODBL we have to take the poison of the CT with it...

This is getting a bit dramatic.

>> Or DRM. Or P2P distribution. Or, by the letter of GPL 2, *internet*
>> distribution. Or non-US law. Or...
>
> Stick to the comments made, not what you wish they were...

The comment made ignores the full extent of the changes made to the GPL 
and thereby misrepresented the change as being less major than it is.

The point I was originally trying to make is that *you* may regard the 
switch from GPL 2 to GPL 3 as minor, but *some* people don't.

>> Wrong and wrong. A couple of the EU 2.0 licences covered DB right. 3.0
>> doesn't (it just mentions DB copyright in order to make clear that it
>> doesn't cover DB right) .
>
> It doesn't effect me, I'm just repeating what others have told me,
> they seem to be of a different opinion...

Then they are wrong AFAIK.

> I believe CC-by-SA v2 also
> allows you to also use country specific cc-by-sa licenses, so take
> your pick on that, the outcome is the same...

Not for data released under a country licence that covers DB right.

- Rob.