[OSM-legal-talk] Contents Licence for OSM Data

[Rob Myers]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 02/11/14 02:11 PM, Alex Barth wrote:
> 
> We have no significant third party ODbL data releases due to OSM 
> share alike to show for,

Then clearly OMS should have stuck with BY-SA for the database, as
that did gain third party data releases.

> but clear reasons and examples of people walking away from the 
> project because of share alike.

If switching to a license that is more amenable to proprietary use
hasn't stopped increasing numbers of people "walking away" then,
again, the project should have stuck with BY-SA.

So the stronger share-alike license got more of the positive results
that you are blaming the weaker license for not achieving, and caused
less of the alleged harm you are attributing to it.

That sounds like an argument for stronger copyleft, not weaker.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUVtFBAAoJECciMUAZd2dZ3SoIAJ0NApsIcSEMUSiqnhvnY3fF
u3vY3n5MU5gNrJV9WxSwLObyV2imyMPfbZhlF2OPQCXp8D4uN6Mot+9/cD7F7nan
pjb0YIeHC0oruQrShoRTXFaHVCHBK7N4zOfhT+aI+gbavToYcGgcU4y38kM+DLml
M7HA246sFny7NjckGJqmyDoOp/U0Nhw3YHFII1ZfG7j1yohYSrVE40WE2/D0oPs/
pExMVktZija/rG9moXwyQyd/vdAMizcFlbpfPEAWDyYDpKOn0+l+WWK6Oiw2626r
ekKYAq+YDNf8lWl3o5SzmJS0uLLlzG/mSOK1+OUL7oq69t4HpGCQ471PvMHorRc=
=NhmN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----