[odc-discuss] (no subject)
fjmd1a at gmail.com
Fri Mar 27 20:16:11 UTC 2015
2015-03-27 20:02 GMT+00:00 Andrew Rens <andrewrens at gmail.com>:
> I am new to this list although not new to okfn.
> I am hoping to understand the apparent incompatibility of
> ODC-By and the ODC-ODbL.
They are intended to complement each other much as CC-BY and CC-BY-SA do.
> As most of you know attribution only software licences such as the BSD's,
> MIT etc and CC By licence do not require that derivatives should be
> licensed under the same licence. However the ODC-ODbL has the following:
> "4.2 Notices. If You Publicly Convey this Database, any Derivative
> Database, or the Database as part of a Collective Database, then You must:
> a. Do so only under the terms of this License;
> b. Include a copy of this License or its Uniform Resource Identifier (URI)
> with the Database or Derivative Database, including both in the Database or
> Derivative Database and in any relevant documentation"
> The result is that Derivative Databases must be licensed under the same
> licence which is effectively a copyleft provision.
Yes, precisely. ODC-ODbL is intended to be a copyleft licence, much like
CC-BY-SA, though just slightly more strongly copyleft than CC-BY-SA v4.0.
> But why then have ODC-ODbL?
Do you mean, why have ODC-By?
I am afraid I am obtusely unable to understand your question.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the odc-discuss