[odc-discuss] An attribution-only version of the open database license

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Wed Nov 18 11:13:57 UTC 2009


Matt Amos wrote:
> and, of course, if someone really wants an NC license they could just
> hack it into the ODbL, or create their own. nothing is gained from not
> having a license variant, just because we don't agree with it.

It's whether or not you want to lend them your credibility. It's whether 
or not you want your "brand" (ODbL, or OKFN) to cover "less open" things 

Taking your example, and Steve's "giving people choice", to the extreme 
that would mean that Creative Commons should also create a 
"CC-All-Rights-Reserved" license because hey, people are going to do 
that anyway!

But maybe I'm too political here; personally, I think that the "ND" and 
"NC" licenses that CC seem to support are a step *away* from what my 
idea of a "creative commons" (without the caps) is, and I would at least 
urge OKFN to think hard whether it is in their interest to endorse 
licenses that have building blocks like that.


More information about the odc-discuss mailing list