>Interoperability of data would be nice, but as far as I am concerned >it’s not a primary aim unless the interoperability is with other >similarly free (freedom) and licensed such that further redistribution >is also free. > >Simon
I understand that, and I'm not trying to reopen the argument about PD v. ODbL (although I find the idea that freedom can only come from the barrel of a license deeply depressing). I was responding to a set of questions about whether or not ODbL was compatible with CC licenses, and pointing out that the use of the ODbL contradicts CC policy on database licensing. This tends to indicate that compatibility conversations would have to start at that level and not the "are the freedoms compatible in these two licenses" level. I also have a use case, one of a few that turned us from an ODbL path towards a PD path. It'd be nice to get a WSGR reaction to it. If Big Company decides to run a mechanical turk contest on Amazon to extract facts from your DB one at a time, do they violate the license without having ever signed it - can they possibly be bound by it if they haven't signed it, clicked ok on a digital box etc? And at what point does the individual person working in the turk contest infringe - 5 facts, 10 facts, 100 facts? And who would you sue in the event you wanted to take it to court? jtw -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- John Wilbanks VP for Science, Creative Commons http://creativecommons.org http://sciencecommons.org http://neurocommons.org "We make sharing easy, legal, and scalable." ---------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
