[okfn-discuss] Modding CC-licenses for data

Mon Jun 25 10:04:19 UTC 2007

<quote who="Rufus Pollock" date="Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 09:07:36AM +0100">
> However, in general, I'm still not sure why you wouldn't want to use
> an open license as opposed to a waiver. In particular one might want
> to impose attribution or sharealike type provisions.

I was under the impressions that it was two fold. One was a set of
practical barriers to sharing information that doing so would entail.
This, of course, could be offset by types or problems that you mention.

The second, and more important, was a feeling that the DB rights were of
dubious legality  or long-term enforcability (since they are very
juristiction specific, at the moment) and that arguing for control or IP
in DBs is, in the process, arguing for stronger IP. We have to be *very*
careful when we do this because we stand to lose a whole lot more than
what we gain.

It's a tricky situation to know when and where this happens but I found
John Wilbank's description of the situation reasonably convincing. I
don't think anyone has a problem with your desire to have copyleft
provisions. They have a problem with arguing for the property necessary
to make it stick. We *really* shouldn't be on that side of that argument
at this stage of the fight.

Regards,
Mako

-- 
Benjamin Mako Hill
mako at atdot.cc
http://mako.cc/

Creativity can be a social contribution, but only in so
far as society is free to use the results. --RMS
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-discuss/attachments/20070625/9822b45d/attachment.sig>