Anthony <osm <at> inbox.org> writes: >What about dual licensing under CC-BY-SA and ODbL? That way you can keep the >CC-BY-SA contributions.Of course, it doesn't make much sense, because the whole >point of ODbL is that it's more restrictive than CC-BY-SA.
It makes a little bit of sense: the ODbL does have looser attribution requirements and would (I believe) make it possible to produce public domain map tiles, rather than having them CC-BY-SA. That might open up a few new applications or encourage a few companies which have been reluctant to use the data under CC to start using it under ODbL. (Though personally I doubt that many will - legal departments frightened by Creative Commons licences are unlikely to look kindly on the much more legalistic ODbL.) I think it would be a better transition, though - start using ODbL in parallel now, and if at some point in the future CC-BY-SA licensing is shown to cause real problems with enforcing share-alike (which on all available real-world evidence so far looks unlikely, but I'm told the possibility exists) then there could be a separate decision to move to ODbL only (which would not require deleting people's data). -- Ed Avis <[email protected]> _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
