Hi, Simon Ward wrote: > On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 06:20:32PM +0200, Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote: >> I cannot speak for everyone, but I do think that the general idea is to make >> the ODbL work like a copyleft license (i.e. you're required to distribute >> the "source" data only to the people you distribute the maps to). You'll >> have >> to wait for the final, revised version to be sure. > > I’d rather not wait for a less than acceptable licence. I’d like to > sort out any problems beforehand. > > For me, allowing my contributions to be distributed without a > share-alike is going to take some pretty damn good convincing.
The issue that you are quoting Ivan with is not a share-alike-or-not-share-alike question. It is the question of whom you have to share with. The *current* license (and also the usual GNU licenses) say that if you give a derived product to X, you also have to give X the source code and the rights to pass it on etc. (and X *might* then choose to make everything public - mut he might also not). The propsed license text - and I believe that is by accident rather than by design - always talks about the public: If you give THE PUBLIC a derived product you also have to etc.etc., but what if you give it only to X? Bye Frederik _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk