[OSM-legal-talk] Are CT contributors are in breach of the CC-BY-SA license?
fjmd1a at gmail.com
Sun Apr 17 14:17:02 BST 2011
On 17 April 2011 13:30, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
> The question is whether you can upload a CC-BY-SA licensed work under
> any other license than CC-BY-SA?
I am sorry if I misunderstood your original question. I am not quite
sure I understand this one. What do you mean by "upload .. .under" a
licence? That doesn't make sense to me. Do you mean, "does CC-BY-SA"
permit a contributor to contribute to OSMF under the existing
contributor terms? (Answer: no) or do you mean something else?
> If I grant you a license to use a creative work under CC-BY-SA, can
> you then give it to some third party under a different license? I
> don't see that CC-BY-SA permits this.
Yes, for some values of "a different licence". Eg, CC-BY-SA 3.0 (us version):
Clause 4(b) permits the distribution of the work under certain other
licences, including "Creative Commons Compatible Licence(s)".
Its a bafflingly drafted licence (if I may say) since it also says
"You may not sublicense the Work" (in clause 4(a)) which directly
contradicts what is said in 4(b). Clearly what is intended is that
there is a general rule against sublicensing, subject to a specific
set of permissions under clause 4(b) even though this comes under a
heading "Restrictions". Re-distribution under a licence is
sublicensing and cannot be anything else.
As I have said (possibly on another list - I lose track) CC-BY-SA does
prevent a broad and general sublicence of the kind found in many
projects such as clause 2 in the contributor terms.
More information about the legal-talk