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

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Anthony wrote:
> C'mon, that's what "weak copyleft" means.  Not viral for some types of
> derived works.

If that is indeed the definition of "weak copyleft" - and I'd like you 
to cite a source on that - then we're changing from one sort of weak 
copyleft license to another sort of weak copyleft license.

But (a) I don't think you have the definition right, and (b) I don't 
even know why we're debating which labels from software licensing are 
applicable to ODbL. You can call ODbL "blue copyleft" or "mint copyleft" 
if you want, it doesn't help the discussion.

If you make a produced work based on a derived database under ODbL, you 
have to share the database but not the work. If you do the same under 
CC-BY-SA, you have to share the work but not the database. Which license 
is "strong" and which is "weak"? The differ in where exactly share-alike 
is applied, but they do not differ in strength.

Bye
Frederik

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