[odc-discuss] mistake in ODC-AL text?
fjmd1a at gmail.com
Sun Aug 25 08:51:06 UTC 2013
I am not responsible for the licence and this is only my personal view, but
it seems to me that it must refer to 4.4. There is no 8.4.
Clause 4.4 is the mechanism that allows a licensee to allow others to be
licensed. The licence is direct from the original licensor, so there is no
It is this process that section 9.1 must be referring to. It protects
anyone who has obtained a licence under that process from having their
licence terminated merely because the original licensee has misbehaved.
That is how the licence would read with "4.8" replaced with "4.4".
I don't know what (if any) the process is for linking to and/or approving
translations of the licence is. If no-one says anything on this list in the
next few days (it is a holiday in England on Monday so responses may be a
little slow) remind me and I will raise the matter with someone at the OKF
who curate the licence.
2013/8/25 Maurizio Napolitano <maurizio.napolitano at okfn.org>
> A group of italian lawyers started to translate the website of
> For the italian OpenStreetMap Comunity is very important have
> an italian version of the ODbL.
> During this translation process they have identified a section of the
> document that doesn't seem consistent.
> They started from this website http://opendatacommons.org/**
> licenses/by/1.0/ <http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1.0/> and say
> that in the section 9.1 there is a reference to the section 4.8
> They say that maybe should be 8.4
> It's right?
> Another question:
> once finished the translation, what is the procedure to add the italian
> version to the main site?
> Thanks a lot!
> odc-discuss mailing list
> odc-discuss at lists.okfn.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/**options/odc-discuss<http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/odc-discuss>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the odc-discuss