[OSM-legal-talk] Best license for future tiles?

[Anthony]

On Fri, Nov 19, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> For me, as a PD advocate, the more licenses you license the stuff under the
> better as it will combine the loopholes of every single one.
>
> If, however, you intend to "protect" our data by putting it under a
> share-alike data, then any additional license you add weakens that
> "protection". Your suggestion would effectively kill the relatively strong
> share-alike element of ODbL that requires people to share the database
> *behind* a produced work, rather than just the work itself.

So why are you, as a PD advocate, in favor of the ODbL?

That aspect of ODbL is particularly nasty, if in fact it is
enforcible.  Whether or not it is, once you throw the DbCL into the
mix, I don't know.