<div dir="ltr">Allow me to gently suggest that we try to keep this thread grounded in concrete concerns. I am always up for some flag-waving about sharealike versus PD, but I think it would be best housed in a new thread or the talk list (it's a general enough principle that the larger community deserves to weigh in if it's to be revisited).<div><br></div><div>Stace has pointed to specific use cases that I suspect many of us would like OSM to support--academic research subject to temporary embargo and scenarios with serious privacy limitations--and to the current lack of guidance being a stumbling block. </div><div><br></div><div>Stace, do you feel the guideline under consideration would address the kind of roadblocks you've referenced?</div><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Steve Coast <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:steve@asklater.com" target="_blank" onclick="window.open('https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&tf=1&to=steve@asklater.com&cc=&bcc=&su=&body=','_blank');return false;">steve@asklater.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word">I designed a license concept that’s relevant as an alternative way of thinking about this:<div><br></div><div><span style="white-space:pre-wrap"> </span><a href="http://stevecoast.com/2015/09/30/license-ascent/" target="_blank">http://stevecoast.com/2015/09/30/license-ascent/</a></div><div><br></div><div>On a different note: It’s a false dichotomy to compare OSM and Public Domain, it’s really about comparing buying a proprietary map (which the OP didn’t mention that I saw) and OSM. If you want all these rights, you can just pick up the phone and pay HERE or TomTom for them, they’d love to hear from you. From that standpoint OSM looks wonderful of course.</div><div><br></div><div>Best</div><div><br></div><div>Steve</div><div><br><div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div class="h5"><div>On Oct 9, 2015, at 12:56 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar <<a href="mailto:seav80@gmail.com" target="_blank" onclick="window.open('https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&tf=1&to=seav80@gmail.com&cc=&bcc=&su=&body=','_blank');return false;">seav80@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br></div></div><div><div><div class="h5"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 11:49 PM, Mr. Stace D Maples <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:stacemaples@stanford.edu" target="_blank" onclick="window.open('https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&tf=1&to=stacemaples@stanford.edu&cc=&bcc=&su=&body=','_blank');return false;">stacemaples@stanford.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word;font-size:14px;font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">
<div><div><span style="font-family:arial,helvetica,sans-serif">One other question, and I’m just curious, not trying to start a flame war. Isn’t some of the data in OSM from public domain datasets? If so, what is the OSM rationale for placing a more restrictive licensing model on that data?</span></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Well, this issue is actually a "religious" war most commonly known as the BSD vs. GPL debate.<br><br></div><div>Personally, I take issue with your statement that ODbL is a "more restrictive" license than public domain. It all depends on your definition of "restrictive" vis-a-vis "freedom". Public domain or CC-BY-style licensing (aka BSD style) does provide the immediate user with a lot more rights than a share-alike license like ODbL or CC-BY-SA (aka GPL style). However, those rights are only guaranteed for the immediate user. The immediate user can add his own improvements to it and then make those improvements proprietary—a usage right that's allowed. Unfortunately, other users cannot make use of those improvements.<br><br></div><div>On the other hand, a share-alike license aims to be a more sustainable model. It restricts the immediate user on only one aspect: the right to make a share-alike content/data/IP proprietary is explicitly disallowed. This ensures that any improvements are shared back to the community, unlike with the BSD-style licensing.<br></div><div><br></div><div>For me, share-alike licensing for OSM data is a net positive. This licensing ensures that nobody can take the data, improve it to make it even more valuable and then make it proprietary.<br></div><div><br></div></div></div></div></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>legal-talk mailing list<br><a href="mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank" onclick="window.open('https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&tf=1&to=legal-talk@openstreetmap.org&cc=&bcc=&su=&body=','_blank');return false;">legal-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br><a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk</a><br></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
legal-talk mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org" onclick="window.open('https://mail.google.com/mail/?view=cm&tf=1&to=legal-talk@openstreetmap.org&cc=&bcc=&su=&body=','_blank');return false;">legal-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>