Dear Charles, On Sep 22, 2013, at 5:49 AM, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 06:46:55PM -0400, Nick Oosterhof a écrit : >> >> are the Open Database License (ODbL) [1] and Database Contents License >> (DbCL) DSFG [2] compliant? [...] I found an earlier thread [3] where it was >> argued that section 4.6 of the ODbL [1] makes it non-compliant (I presume >> with DSFG 1) [section 4.6 requires that using the database and distributing >> the results requires making the database or 'patch' files available for >> non-profit costs ] >> >> which would restrict people from selling a Derivative Database or Produced >> Work for significant (higher than reasonable production) cost. >> >> Is that a reasonable interpretation? > > in case of use for profit, the section 4.6 requires that the customer can > access to what the DFSG call "source code" or "patch files", with no > unreasonable additional cost. It therefore does not restrict people from > selling a Derivative Database or Produced Work for significant cost. Thanks for the clarification. I think I understand this better now: a customer who pays for the database has to have access to the database can decide for theirselves whether to sell the database to others. > > This is similar to the requirements for conveying non-source forms in the GPL > and the AGPL, which are accepted as Free by Debian. Ok, that makes sense. > I have not studied the other clauses of the ODbL, but section 4.6 therefore > does not seem to make it non-free. Great, thanks for your help in clarifying this. best, Nick -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-legal-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/40331d36-2059-4387-a85a-f5465e460...@gmail.com
