Hello, >> Do you state that ODbL license is equal to a patent when it comes to >> protect the data (apart from being 'free and open')? > No, I mentioned the patent as an example of non-copyright IP that persists > even through a CC-BY-SA chain where it is not mentioned at all. So, in my understanding you have just explained that an imaginery screwdriver can be used to hammer a nail, 'cause nails can be hammered, and giving a hammer as an example. Please do not feel offended, I just hoped for a good explanation of ODbL's 'viralness', escpecially when taking into consideration Produced Work chain, and tiles' CC-By-SA license with "separate channel" with any other rights inside. I understand patents work that way (ie. you can't recreate something), but making it into a license doesn't seem clear to me, and I don't think I've seen a lawyer stating somethink like this. It would be great to have it explained. Sincerely,
Tadeusz Knapik _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
