On 07/24/2010 05:43 PM, Anthony wrote:
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Rob Myers <r...@robmyers.org
<mailto:r...@robmyers.org>> wrote:
On Sat, 24 Jul 2010 11:59:52 -0400, Anthony <o...@inbox.org
<mailto:o...@inbox.org>> wrote:
>
> How?
By acknowledging their existence and using them against themselves.
I don't follow.
The ODbL does the same thing to the restrictions of the DB Right and of
contract law that copyleft does to copyright. It acknowledges them,
asserts them, and then uses them to ensure that they cannot be used to
restrict use any further thereby neutralizing them.
Changing attribution is comparably difficult to relicensing under the
ODbL? I'm sorry for sounding like a broken record, but I don't follow.
It is comparably difficult because it requires consulting the same
number of people about an issue that some people have surprisingly
strong objections to.
> Personally I disagree with that hallucination. A mash-up is a
derivative
> work. In fact, I'd say it's pretty much the quintessential
example of
the
> derivative work.
I agree with you. But the community standards of OSM don't seem to.
But that just doesn't make any logical sense.
It doesn't make any *legal* sense. ;-)
- Rob.
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
