[OSM-legal-talk] Is the "data share-alike" road navigable?

OJW streetmap at blibbleblobble.co.uk
Thu Mar 8 20:32:11 GMT 2007


On Thursday 08 March 2007 12:57, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Many people say that it is not too bad, because as your book  
> depicting the bins and trees is SA, someone else could now simply  
> take the locations from your book and put them back into OSM, so  
> while you aren't forced to give us your data, you are forced to allow  
> others to "reverse-engineer" your data from your final product.
>
> Of course, from a programmer's viewpoint, that sounds like an awful  
> waste of time.

Looking at our current sources of data:
* landsat photos in some projection
* yahoo photos in some other projection
* old printed OS maps in airy lat/long
* old printed OS maps in BNGR
* other paper maps without any apparent projection

Compare that with the data-sources that we _do_ have vectors for (TIGER and 
PGS)  And its surprising that all these weird "output-only" formats (like 
folded sheets of paper) have been so useful, compared with digital data in an 
"almost-similar-enough-but-not-quite" format...





More information about the legal-talk mailing list