Apologies for the delay in my response.
Any sucess/feedback?
Not from their general inquiry address; I've put another line in via a
shared contact.
I've been meaning to ask if you could clarify a bit further, and/or correct
my understanding of the situation.
You wrote:
The actual requirement is in 4(c):
You must comply with the conditions in Section 3(a) if You Share all or
a substantial portion of the contents of the database. which is a bit
more than just 3(a)1,
3(a) also includes subsections 2, 3 and 4. My message discussed 2; 3 and 4
reads as follows:
If requested by the Licensor, You must remove any of the information
required by Section 3(a)(1)(A) to the extent reasonably practicable.
If You Share Adapted Material You produce, the Adapter's License You apply
must not prevent recipients of the Adapted Material from complying with
this Public License.
the extent reasonably practicable sounds to me like it could be satisfied
by editing http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors.
3(a)(4) is a pass-through of the attribution requirement, but the
flexibility afforded in 3(a)(2) means that OSM's current practices should
accommodate it.
Nope. I was referring to collective databases in the ODbL which are
roughly the equivalent of collective works in early versions of CC
licenses and only require the OSM derived part to be subject to the ODbL
terms.
This is the part I think I could use help understanding. My impression is
that a collective database can contain ODbL and non-ODbL content
side-by-side. Are you saying that CC-BY 4.0 makes this impossible because
its attribution requirements would attach to the non-ODbL content as well?
Tom
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
