[OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

[Dirk-Lüder Kreie]

Am 08.08.2010 09:03, schrieb Russ Nelson:
> SteveC writes:
>  > As in, why is the PD camp so loud here?
> 
> First and foremost, because we believe that all the licensing
> kerfluffle will frighten people away from using the map.  Because we
> all want a map that will actually be USED by the most people possible.
> Because we aren't afraid of forks (people who fork, fork themselves
> hardest).  Because if somebody "steals" parts of the map, we will be
> able to tell, and won't hesitate to point it out.  Because nobody can
> own public domain data; not even somebody who wishes they could slap a
> copyright on it and claim it as their own.  Because the ODbL and
> CC-By-SA impose a cost on the community.  I mean, if we're going to
> get rid of contributors on purpose, then at least let's get rid of the
> people who think a reciprocal license solves a problem.
> 
> The OSM strength of OSM is not the data; it's the people.  The license
> doesn't protect the people; the people protect the people.  Nobody can
> can steal, fork, clone, or whatever, our community.
> 
> Data is dead; people are alive. Let's worry more about the people than
> the license on the data.

Plus, with the user base OSM has, it will be more current than any
(commercial) fork, and a moving target to keep syncing to.

I'm still strongly in favor of letting old edits time out to CC0/PD in a
timeframe of 3-5 years. That kind of map data is *really* old, why try
to slap an arbitrary license on it?

-- 
Dirk-Lüder "Deelkar" Kreie
Bremen - 53.0901°N 8.7868°E

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20100810/f6462102/attachment-0001.pgp>