[odc-discuss] Concerns about the ODBL preventing copying cost recovery

[MJ Ray]

Rob Myers wrote:
> On 08/20/2010 02:06 PM, MJ Ray wrote:
> > that interpretation of "free of charge" would mean that ODbL is
> > effectively a "Non-Commercial" licence in some fields of endeavour and
> 
> No it wouldn't. You can charge for Produced Works and you can charge for 
> physical media.

OK, I'd overlooked the ability to charge for Produced Works because
of the example (not-for-profit campaign organisation) I had in mind.

I agree that it could be burdonsome, as it would mean charging enough
for Produced Words to cover the cost of some *possible* free-of-charge
access later which not all users would take up.

> [...] The MPL 
> doesn't mention charging for code at all and the GPL v3 has 
> circumstances under which you cannot charge for source. Both are DFSG-free.

I'm not sure if "Both are DFSG-free" is just a shorthand or if that
indicates confusion about what the Debian Free Software Guidelines
cover - they are applied to particular pieces of software and while a
licence can enable freedom of a software package, it cannot ensure it.

Thanks again for the pointer to charging for produced work.
-- 
MJ Ray (slef) Webmaster and developer for hire at | software
www.software.coop http://mjr.towers.org.uk        |  .... co
IMO only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html |  .... op