Timeline for Can a database include both ODbL and CC BY-SA works?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 7, 2023 at 16:07 | comment | added | Tin Man | @Mitar It seems that indeed you shouldn't combine the two in one database. You could have two wholly separate databases, but you have to evaluate whether that's worth the effort. | |
| Mar 6, 2023 at 14:09 | comment | added | Mitar | Have you ever resolved this question? | |
| Apr 16, 2021 at 11:19 | comment | added | Tin Man | I think I didn't word my comment on the term "work" correctly. The specific term "work" might be defined by copyright law, but in the context of reusing open content and open-source licenses, it's the definition of terms like "derived work"/"adapted material"/"produced work"/etc. that is relevant to whether and how work can be reused. And that does vary from license to license. | |
| Apr 16, 2021 at 11:15 | comment | added | Tin Man | CC BY-SA defines both the terms "licensed material" and "adapted material" — see creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode | |
| Apr 16, 2021 at 11:13 | comment | added | Tin Man | ODbL defines "produced work" as "a work (such as an image, audiovisual material, text, or sounds) resulting from using the whole or a Substantial part of the Contents (via a search or other query) from this Database, a Derivative Database, or this Database as part of a Collective Database" | |
| Apr 16, 2021 at 11:13 | comment | added | Tin Man | @user253751 Actually, terms like "derivative work" are generally specifically defined in licenses and vary from license to license. | |
| Apr 15, 2021 at 8:47 | comment | added | Criticizing Israel not allowed | @TinMan I believe "work" is defined by copyright law, not by the license. | |
| Apr 14, 2021 at 18:40 | comment | added | Tin Man | @user253751 It's a bit more complex, as the definition of a "work" is different for CC BY-SA than for ODbL, AFAIK. In my case, a CC BY-SA license would apply to a group of strings describing an item. This would be a single entry in a database. ODbL seems to apply to entire databases, though. What I'm wondering is if I can take entries from an ODbL database and combine them with CC BY-SA entries inside a single database. | |
| Apr 14, 2021 at 17:33 | comment | added | Criticizing Israel not allowed | so then the question is, is your database an adapted version of the ODbL database, or is it the ODbL database alongside your own database? Just like with software libraries. | |
| Apr 14, 2021 at 17:32 | comment | added | apsillers♦ | @user253751 The plain-English summary identifies ODbL as having a "share-alike" requirement, "If you publicly use any adapted version of this database... you must also offer that adapted database under the ODbL." The licenses draws a distinction between Derivative and Collective databases (per the last quote here); the answer to this question largely hinges on when a database is one or the other. | |
| Apr 14, 2021 at 17:28 | comment | added | Criticizing Israel not allowed | No such thing as "a database rather than individual works". A database can be a work. The license only applies to the stuff it comes with, it doesn't apply to bits you add on. Note that the only reason the GPL applies to the bits you add on is because it says so - "if you don't apply this license also to the bits you add on, then you don't have permission to use the stuff this license comes with". (That's known as copyleft.) Does the ODbL have a copyleft clause? | |
| Apr 14, 2021 at 16:36 | history | asked | Tin Man | CC BY-SA 4.0 |