[OSM-talk] Suggestion to add SA clause to CT section 3, describing "free and open license"

[Anthony]

On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 4:50 AM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:

> I realize that there are others who believe that the lawyers advising OSMF
> are wrong, and that CC-BY-SA could indeed be used further. I have doubts
> about this and would like the proponents of that idea put forward concrete
> plans about how to implement CC-BY-SA in an internationally balanced way (so
> that e.g. users in the US do not have more rights than users in Europe or
> Australia), and also how to handle attribution. These things are currently
> broken with CC-BY-SA and if someone wants to retain that license he should
> demonstrate how they can be fixed.
>

Wasn't it you who said that the only way to get consistent treatment over
OSM internationally is to make it PD?  If it wasn't you then I hope you'll
think about it and realize that it's true.  ODBL is not "internationally
balanced".  Users in the US still have more rights than users in Europe or
Australia.

By the way, I have no idea if the lawyers advising OSMF are wrong.  I
haven't had a chance to interview them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100720/c1477338/attachment.html>