On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 11:29 PM, Anthony <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 5:10 AM, Rob Myers <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 07/24/2010 05:46 PM, Anthony wrote: >> >>> >>> But that would mean that mashing up CC-BY-SA data with ODbL data would >>> violate CC-BY-SA. >>> >> >> Copyleft licences (or a copyleft licence and a hybrid copyright/DB >> Right/contract law conceptual approximation of sharealike) are *generally* >> mutually incompatible as they require derivative works to be placed under >> the same single licence. >> >> You can however mash-up the produced work under BY-SA. >> > > Only if you license the produced work under BY-SA. Which means *all > elements* of the produced work are under BY-SA. Which means *the data* > encapsulated in the produced work is under BY-SA. Which means anybody who > extracts the data back out of the produced work would get the data under > BY-SA. > > But looking at the text of the license, I don't think you can do that. > ODbL Section 4.6 says "If You Publicly Use a Derivative Database or a > Produced Work from a Derivative Database, You must also offer to recipients > of the Derivative Database or Produced Work a copy in a machine readable > form..." But that is incompatible with BY-SA, which says that "You may not > offer or impose any terms on the Work that alter or restrict the terms of > this License or the recipients' exercise of the rights granted hereunder." > A produced work under BY-SA can be publicly used without offering recipients > the source database. But a produced work from an ODbL database cannot be > publicly used without offering recipients the source database. > > I'm not sure if that's intentional or not. I suspect the creators of the > ODbL wanted to have their cake and eat it too. But you can't do that. If > the data can be used in a produced work under BY-SA, then the data has to be > BY-SA. >
You said, "Which means *all elements* of the produced work are under BY-SA." This is already the invalid step in your "proof". If I license a Wikipedia article under CC-BY-SA, that doesn't mean that the pictures in that article have to be CC-BY-SA. If I license an album of songs under CC-BY-SA, that doesn't mean that each song in the album have to be CC-BY-SA as well.
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
