[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] The OSM licence: where we are, where we're going

[rob at robmyers.org]

Quoting Jochen Topf <jochen at remote.org>:

> So what? Either we can provide a better experience and better value for
> lots of people, in which case they would stick with us. Or we don't. In
> which case we deserve to die. Lets compete on the value we create and not
> rely on the restrictions we impose.

The ability to use the data freely is valuable. Indeed since complete  
proprietary maps of most countries and some continents already exist  
it is the unique selling potential and core value of OSM.

Replacing this with an ideological commitment to market competition  
distracts from this and destroys the unique value of OSM.

> Already our current license doesn't restrict anybody from forking the
> project and/or not contributing his changes back to us. So what *exactly*
> is this dreaded scenario of the bad guys taking our stuff and running
> with it. And how does the current license prevent that?

The licence isn't there to protect OSM or to prevent forking. As you  
point out, it can't. The licence is there to protect the freedom of  
individuals to use the data wherever they encounter it. Not to protect  
OSM from a "bad" project, but to protect people from a "bad" instance  
of the data.

The point is not that the *project* is free" or protected. The point  
is that *people* always retain their freedom to use the geodata/maps.  
By "use" I mean "work with", not "prevent others from using". Anyone  
worrying that copyleft prevents people from preventing other people  
from enjoying the same freedoms they have enjoyed has their priorities  
very badly wrong.

- Rob.