I appreciate the nudge--looks like my contact promised a check-in after a pending call with CC HQ, but that failed to materialize. I've emailed to follow up. Apologies, this dropped off my radar.
On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 7:46 AM, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote: > Tom, any feedback yet? > > Simon > > > Am 14.07.2015 um 16:22 schrieb Tom Lee: > > I'll add that I've been in touch with CC's US affiliate and they've > expressed interest in resolving the compatibility question (either with > formal guidance that applies to 4.0 or in preparation for the next license > revision). That's on hold pending their availability at summer's end; stay > tuned. > > >> To clarify a bit, any CC licenses that are ND or NC are non-open and >> clearly incompatible with the ODbL or any open license. CC BY SA 4.0 is >> currently incompatible, but Creative Commons could change that. >> >> CC BY 2.0, 2.5, and 3.0 are clearly incompatible, thanks to the >> attribution requirements that can't be met. >> >> CC BY 4.0 has some open questions about compatibility. >> > > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing > listlegal-talk@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > > > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > >
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
