<HTML>
<FONT FACE="MS Shell Dlg" DEFAULT="FACE"><FONT SIZE="1" POINTSIZE="8" DEFAULT="SIZE">On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:43:38 +1000, John Smith wrote:<BR>
<BR>
>2009/12/14 Brendan Morley <<FONT COLOR=0000ff><U>morb.gis@beagle.com.au<FONT COLOR=000000 DEFAULT="COLOR"></U>>:<BR>
>> the large print promised to address<BR>
>> "holding back people from using them in creative, productive, or unexpected<BR>
>> ways"? SA still holds them back somewhat.<BR>
><BR>
>I disagree, it doesn't hold you back from any of those uses, it just<BR>
>requires you give back if you make changes, and so if you don't make<BR>
>changes to the data there is no limitation on what you can do with it,<BR>
>or how you can use it, and so on.<BR>
<BR>
And that requirement has a chilling effect (holds you back) on some "productive ways". Hypothetical example: I want to put my fast food joints on a map. If I licenced from a typical commercial provider, I pay a one time consideration, produce my mashed up work, and be done with it. If I licenced from OSM contributors under OdbL, I would have to make my "working notes" for my fast food locations available to anyone who wanted them for perpetuity. So I'd have to establish a role in my company to keep those working notes safe. I think. I'd better hire a lwayer to be sure.<BR>
<BR>
>> I can appreciate that the founders definitely intended sharelike/copyleft<BR>
>> principles. But IMHO it's certainly not marketed as a feature to fresh<BR>
>> recruits!<BR>
><BR>
>Again, lets not confuse 2 issues here, are you talking about using, or<BR>
>extending, I assume the latter, but the former has no intended<BR>
>restrictions.<BR>
<BR>
Extending/editing.<BR>
<BR>
Brendan<BR>
<BR>
</HTML>