[OSM-legal-talk] License question, user clicking on map

Paul Norman penorman at mac.com
Fri Mar 1 18:20:29 UTC 2013

AND would be unlikely to grant permission to distribute on a non-sharealike license. Nearmap would also be an issue, although they might of already granted permission. UMP might also be a mess. I’m aware of a few smaller instances of data that would have to be removed, and there could be other big ones.


For the PD issue, which is what my comment is about, there are plenty of government data sources that are incompatible with a PD-like license, e.g. CanVec, GeoBase, French Cadastre, Australian government data, UK OS, UK Natpan, LINZ, and there are plenty of others on a sub-national level. Also, because we’d be using a PD-like license[1] and not PD agencies which are obliged to only publish PD data would still be unable to publish our data.

[1]: Because in some jurisdictions there’s no way for someone to actually place something in the public domain.


From: Alex Barth [mailto:alex at mapbox.com] 
Sent: Friday, March 01, 2013 7:37 AM
To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License question, user clicking on map


The public domain argument is a bit of a red herring. If OSM used a PD-like license like PDDL or CC0 then we would be unable to make use of most of the external sources that we use, having to drop at a bare minimum 40% of the ways in the DB, and likely much more.


Interesting, can you expand on this a little more? Like for instance what's a good example of a current external source or two effectively requiring us to have a share-alike license?


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20130301/592b39f5/attachment.html>

More information about the legal-talk mailing list