[OSM-legal-talk] [talk] New site about the license change

Rob Myers rob at robmyers.org
Tue Nov 16 22:37:32 GMT 2010


On 11/16/2010 10:08 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Rob Myers wrote:
>> As does OSM's existing CC-BY-SA 2.0 licence.
>
> I believe such an upgrade path was how Wikipedia changed from GFDL to
> CC-BY-SA, wasn't it? They got the makers of GFDL to release a newer
> version of GFDL that would provide an upgrade window.

It was a different upgrade path from the one in BY-SA but basically yes.

BY-SA 2.0 and above state that you can relicence derivatives 
(adaptations) under a later licence or a licence from a different 
jurisdiction:

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/legalcode

4.b: "You may distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or 
publicly digitally perform a Derivative Work only under the terms of 
this License, a later version of this License with the same License 
Elements as this License, or a Creative Commons iCommons license that 
contains the same License Elements as this License (e.g. 
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Japan)"

With Wikipedia, the FSF released a special point version of the FDL that 
would allow large wiki projects (hint, hint ;-) ) to vote to relicence 
to BY-SA for a limited time period.

> If Creative Commons had been more friendly towards the data licensing
> issue, a similar window could have been opened in a hypothetical

Sure.

It might still be worth asking them about this if people haven't already.

- Rob.



More information about the legal-talk mailing list