On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 12:07 AM, John Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > On 18 June 2011 01:46, Eugene Alvin Villar <[email protected]> wrote: >> Let me try copyright-only examples. >> >> I can take up the full text of all of the works of William >> Shakespeare, compile it into a book with annotations, and release the >> book under CC-BY-SA. Now since the original text by Shakespeare is >> already in the public domain, I can copy those parts from the book >> without following the book's CC license. In this case, the CC license >> has no way to restrict me from doing that. >> >> Here's another example. All English Wikipedia articles are licensed >> CC-BY-SA. Most articles have images. Some images are *not* licensed >> CC-BY-SA. In fact, many of such images are included in the article >> under fair use reasoning. That doesn't give the reader the license to >> use such images under CC-BY-SA simply because they were included in >> CC-BY-SA-licensed articles. > > The problem here isn't cc-by-sa, it's bigger picture stuff, from what > I understand/have been led to believe, the ODBL doesn't limit what > license produced works can be published under, outside of the EU there > is limited or no database rights, so if tiles are produced and > published under PD/CC0/CC-by/CC-by-SA there is no limitation on > deriving, selling etc etc those tiles, other than what those copyright > licenses limit you to do, obviously deriving cc-by-sa tiles would need > to be under a cc-by-sa license etc. > > I don't wish to complicate this issue, but I'm led to believe that a > lot of database rights are yet to have precedents, I think this would > be pointless conjecture at this time. > > Frederik and others were trying to claim there was some kind of > implied limit on derivatives, even in non-EU countries, which comes > back to my original question about minimum license, or websites > needing to have a binding contract on the end user to limit or prevent > turning information on tiles back into some kind of vector data set. > > Then you have a whole other argument over what constitutes a produced > work and so on.
I don't think you're going to get clear answers about these specific cases. It will take a court decision to provide precedent rulings on such things. And this is not a problem specific to ODbL. Even CC licenses have unresolved problems, like a question I thought of regarding how a person in country A will be able to use a work released under a CC license that was ported to country B. Should the person in country A follow provisions in CC-license-ported-to-B even if that doesn't apply to his jurisdiction? Can he use the work in CC-license-ported-to-A? Or can he revert to the unported CC license? _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
