Re: ODbL / DbCL licenses: not DFSG compliant?
Le Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 06:46:55PM -0400, Nick Oosterhof a écrit :
> are the Open Database License (ODbL)  and Database Contents License (DbCL) DSFG  compliant? It seems they are not, but I would like to make sure.
> Specifically I found an earlier thread  where it was argued that section 4.6 of the ODbL  makes it non-compliant (I presume with DSFG 1), as this section reads:
> "Access to Derivative Databases. If You Publicly Use a Derivative Database or a Produced Work from a Derivative Database, You must also offer to recipients of the Derivative Database or Produced Work a copy in a machine readable form of:
> a. The entire Derivative Database; or
> b. A file containing all of the alterations made to the Database or the method of making the alterations to the Database (such as an algorithm), including any additional Contents, that make up all the differences between the Database and the Derivative Database.
> The Derivative Database (under a.) or alteration file (under b.) must be available at no more than a reasonable production cost for physical distributions and free of charge if distributed over the internet."
> which would restrict people from selling a Derivative Database or Produced Work for significant (higher than reasonable production) cost.
> Is that a reasonable interpretation?
in case of use for profit, the section 4.6 requires that the customer can
access to what the DFSG call "source code" or "patch files", with no
unreasonable additional cost. It therefore does not restrict people from
selling a Derivative Database or Produced Work for significant cost.
This is similar to the requirements for conveying non-source forms in the GPL
and the AGPL, which are accepted as Free by Debian.
I have not studied the other clauses of the ODbL, but section 4.6 therefore
does not seem to make it non-free.
Have a nice day,
Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan