[OSM-legal-talk] Share alike

[Richard Fairhurst]

80n wrote:
> I see the example. Are you saying that this is a problem? It 
> looks perfectly fine to me.

Depends what you mean by "problem".

If I were to contrast Scenario A (applying styles programmatically as in the
geowiki.com example, and delivering it via a Flash applet) and Scenario B
(applying styles manually in, say, Illustrator, and delivering it as a
JPEG), it strikes me as silly that the scope of CC-BY-SA differs when the
end result - pixels on a screen - is the same for the user.

If I were to contrast what I actually _do_ with map data (OS, not OSM),
which is to take Scenario B (takes approximately 15 minutes) and then
continue by generalising, labelling, dropping in pull-outs, and so on (takes
about four whole evenings and a bunch of knowledge, skill and personal
judgement, none of which is at all connected to OSM), than I'd say that
CC-BY-SA's scope here crosses the line from "silly" to "batshit insane".

So if by "are you saying this is a problem?" you mean "do you think this
loophole should be closed?", no, I don't. I simply think it renders CC-BY-SA
an ever more ridiculous licence for OSM.

cheers
Richard


-- 
View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-Share-alike-tp5750998p5751623.html
Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.