On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Robert Kaiser <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually, IMHO, it's was wrong of the OSM project to do neither a copyright > assignment nor a license that has a clear clause on automatic possibility of > upgrade to a newer license in the same spirit (i.e. and "and later" clause).
Copyright assignment could never work on a project with 100,000 contributors. CC-BY-SA 2.0 does have an "and later" clause. And ODbL is not in the "same spirit" as CC-BY-SA, any more than LGPL is in the "same spirit" as GFDL. _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
