[OSM-legal-talk] OS Opendata & the new license

[kevin at cordina.org.uk]

It wasn't me, but I agree with whoever it was.

I don't agree with your scenario though.  Surely the users should come to a consensus on the requirements of a licence based on data to be covered, and desired uses of that data, and then a licence selected that permits that.

If the community decides OSM does not wish to permit data of a certain to be included, then that decision should be taken and _then_ an appropriate licence chosen.

The issue here is a licence has been chosen, that appears incompatible with current practise, which is being used a stick to change current practice.  My take is that people are narked because after acting in perfectly sensible ways we are told that all our work may be thrown away due to the licence chosen, which choice doesn't seem to have factored in the policy choice above of whether that data is wanted in OSM.

Hopefully I have pressed the right buttons and this isn't followed by a long signature.

Kevin

------Original Message------
From: Frederik Ramm
Sender: legal-talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org
To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
ReplyTo: Licensing and other legal discussions.
Sent: 29 Sep 2010 11:27
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OS Opendata & the new license

Hi,

Kevin Cordina wrote:
> What's important is that the licence choice be not used as a stick to enforce
> a particular policy about data imports or other aspects of mapping.

And vice versa. "I want to import <dataset> and that's why we cannot use 
<license>" is tail-wagging-dog as well.

Bye
Frederik

_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk


Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device