Matt Amos schreef: > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 8:10 AM, 80n<80n...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Henk Hoff <o...@toffehoff.nl> wrote: >> >>> So if you have a Produced Work based on: >>> - the database: no need for reverse engineering since the database is >>> freely available >>> >> The database is not freely available. It is only available under OdbL. >> > > i think Henk meant "openly available". > I did. > >> The incentive to reverse engineer a produced work would be to create map >> data that isn't constrained by the OdbL. This modification would allow that >> to happen. This is unsatisfactory. >> > > 406! > > i don't think this modification would allow that to happen. i think > the point Henk was trying to make is that the desire to > reverse-engineer might be reduced by the availability of an ODbL > derived database for every public produced work. > > people will still try to remove the ODbL from the data for $REASON, > but (in my opinion) the license can stand without the > reverse-engineering clause. > > +1 > cheers, > > matt > >
Henk _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
