[OSM-talk] What could we do to make this licences discussion more inclusive?

[Peteris Krisjanis]

>> I never said they didn't agree to the ODBL, but that the new CTs,
>> specifically section 3, wasn't going to be compatible, even if ODBL
>> is.
>
> Only if a later license change were to go non-SA.  An hypothetical
> situation that you have created.
>

I know you like to have personal flame war, but in nutshell ODBL is
share alike, so no problems here. I have two questions though:
1) Why we need CT in first place
2) What section 3 is about

Cheers,
Peter.