Hi, On 28 July 2012 14:38, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 01:23:00 +0200 > Tobias Knerr <o...@tobias-knerr.de> wrote: >> Not dropping CC-BY-SA would send the signal that > > ... everything that has been said about CC-BY-SA not sufficiently > protecting our data was rubbish,
Like Tobias said the OSMF now has the weapon to use against a potential trouble and that should be enough. It doesn't need to shoot that weapon in the dark possibly hurting the wrong people. Also it should probably be asked when do those who said that CC-By-SA was potentially not a sufficient protection, consider the myth debunked. It's quite apparent that lawyers disagree (a legal opinion about this has been prepared based on US law), governments of some Commonwealth countries disagree (publishing their geo-and-other- data under CC licenses and planning on increasing this in the future) and case law disagrees (in Commonwealth countries again as well as in Poland). > > Even if you should think that CC-BY-SA is just as good as ODbL, you can > hardly expect OSMF to concede that! It would essentially mean that all > the problems we had with the license change were only created to be > able to offer an *additional* license, ODbL, thereby providing more > choice the downstream users. That would hardly have been a sufficient > reason. I was explained that for some in the OSMF this was the reason to support the license change and this is a fair reasoning. (not providing more choice, but being able to use OSM's data under ODbL) Cheers _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
