[OSM-legal-talk] The big license debate

[Lars Aronsson]

Frederik Ramm wrote:

> But: If my English is not totally broken, then "the same freedom" would 
> refer to the freedom that I enjoyed: taking OSM data and making 
> something from it. *That* same freedom of course exists for everyone, 
> completely undisturbed by my making a proprietary work based on OSM data.

Sorry, this is not convincing.  Have you heard of the Gnu 
Manifesto?  Have you followed the 20 years of discussion between 
GNU/Linux and BSD software developers?  You make it sound as if we 
were here to define "freedom" for the first time.  We're not.

> Perhaps you can elaborate on this. Let's say I spend a man-year working 
> on an atlas based on OSM data. Finally it goes into print. The cost of 
> the book in a bookshop will contain taxes, profit for the bookshop, 
> profit for the publisher, production cost, and payment for my year of 
> work. Another publisher can now take the book, reproduce it, and sell it 

Yes, and that's great!  In fact, that's the whole point of it.  

> True. I honestly believe that if we were to write to all contributors 
> saying "we're changing to PD, do you want us to remove your data then?", 

I don't think this is possible.  What you can do is to start a new 
project from scratch, very similar but based on PD data.  Then you 
can write to all OSM contributors, asking if they want to join 
your project.  There is so much effort and money invested in OSM 
that people expect it to remain what it is.

I think we should look at the practical issues before us.  How can 
we help the ITN guy to use our data in a reasonable way?  How can 
we help the next guy?  One at a time.  I think it *is* workable 
without totally redefining what OSM is.  And I *do* get irritated 
when the latter is suggested every time a new guy enters.


-- 
  Lars Aronsson (lars at aronsson.se)
  Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se