Frederik Ramm <frede...@...> writes: >>That's one reason why I think a dual licence under both the proposed new >>licences and the existing CC-BY-SA is a good idea - because it provides a >>guarantee beyond doubt that all currently allowed uses of the map data will >>still be okay. > >For me, as a PD advocate, the more licenses you license the stuff under >the better as it will combine the loopholes of every single one. > >If, however, you intend to "protect" our data by putting it under a >share-alike data, then any additional license you add weakens that >"protection".
It's curious that two of the strongest defences of 'strong share-alike' come from yourself and Richard F. - but both of you prefer public domain. I, too, would prefer public domain over the ODbL. What's going on? Shouldn't we stop adding more legalese and just focus on transitioning OSM to PD or attribution-only? -- Ed Avis <e...@waniasset.com> _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
