[od-discuss] Fwd: Conformance - Open Government License - Surrey 1.0
Paul Norman
penorman at mac.com
Mon Mar 2 20:28:22 UTC 2015
On 2/26/2015 6:47 PM, Herb Lainchbury wrote:
> I have placed a copy of the revised Open Government License - Surrey
> (City of Surrey, BC, Canada) into our /licenses/inreview repository.
>
> As noted in this thread they have adopted our recommendation and one
> of our two suggestions.
>
> I intend to call for a vote on this new version (2.0) in in a few days.
Looking over my correspondence with Surrey, I believe the license still
has a flaw which prevents conformance with 2.1.3.
There is general agreement that only information* by the City of Surrey
can be licensed under the OGL - Surrey.
I was considering the case where I create a new work of information
which is a mix of Surrey information and information I have created. The
city told me that this would need to be licensed under the OGL - Surrey.
The only problem is that not being the City of Surrey, I can't release
information under their license.
This has in effect created a situation where you have a share-alike
license which only one party can use.
2.1.3 requires that work allow the distribution of derivatives under the
same terms, which you can't do here. It also does not allow derivatives
under different terms.
* information as defined in the license
More information about the od-discuss
mailing list