<html><head></head><body>I don't understand this objection. If a company accidentally publishes something that's a problem with their procedures, not any license (free or proprietary).<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 23 September 2015 15:32:06 GMT-07:00, Alex Barth <alex@mapbox.com> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br /><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Simon Poole <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:simon@poole.ch" target="_blank">simon@poole.ch</a>></span> wrote:<br /><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div id=":24c" class="a3s" style="overflow:hidden">it might actually force<br />
such a service provider to differentiate between geo-coding for public<br />
vs in-house <span class="il">use</span>.</div></blockquote></div><br />This suggestion has come up before and I'd like to flag that this is impractical. No organization would and should take the risk that a potential future (accidental) publication of a private OpenStreetMap based work could jeopardize sensitive data. The risk is significant as even the publication of a Produced Work can bring the share alike stipulations of the ODbL to bear.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br /></div></div>
<p style="margin-top: 2.5em; margin-bottom: 1em; border-bottom: 1px solid #000"></p><pre class="k9mail"><hr /><br />legal-talk mailing list<br />legal-talk@openstreetmap.org<br /><a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk</a><br /></pre></blockquote></div><br>
-- <br>
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.</body></html>