[OSM-talk] What if ODBl 1.0 is superseeded by ODBl 2.0

[Ed Avis]

Frederik Ramm <frederik <at> remote.org> writes:

>I am surprised that none of the respondents seem to have read the 
>license draft which clearly states that "a later version of this 
>license" is allowable, as is "a license compatible with this license".

Hmm, I would prefer it if they didn't put that in the licence itself but left it
to individual projects to decide if they are willing to license under 'ODbL 1,
or (at your option) any later version', as the GPL does.

I'll mention this on the legal mailing list just as soon as I can get messages
through to it (at the moment, at least when sent via Gmane, they seem to get
lost somewhere waiting for moderator approval or something).

-- 
Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com>