[OSM-legal-talk] CT clarification: third-party sources

[Anthony]

On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com> wrote:
> Just a note to say that it is not universally agreed that the ODbL is
> "free and open".  I don't consider it to be a free licence because of the
> contract-law provisions.  However I seem to be in a very small minority
> (perhaps a minority of one) on this point so I don't bang on about it *too* often
> these days.

I've started a discussion of this at
http://freedomdefined.org/Talk:Open_Database_License

Specifically, I question whether or not ODbL satisfies the second criterion:

[quote]The freedom to study the work and apply the information: The
licensee must be allowed to examine the work and to use the knowledge
gained from the work in any way. The license may not, for example,
restrict "reverse engineering".[/quote]