[Osmf-talk] Share Alike images

80n 80n80n at gmail.com
Mon Dec 7 08:39:55 UTC 2009

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 2:17 AM, Matt Amos <matt at asklater.com> wrote:

> Erik Johansson wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 1:53 AM, Matt Amos <matt at asklater.com> wrote:
> >> Erik Johansson wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 12:17 AM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> Erik Johansson wrote:
> >>>>> Anything that was CC-By-SA is always share alike, the ODBL leaves
> that
> >>>>> SA philosophy altogether.
> >>>> No, not leaves it altogether - reduces it to data.
> >>> Being able to remix is the spirit of CC-by-SA, so this is a huge
> >>> change for me.  So It seems no one has a good argument for removing
> >>> Share Alike from the license.
> >> you're referring to share-alike on the images? the proposal isn't
> suggesting
> >> removing share-alike on the data, it's suggesting adding it.
> >>
> >> i've already stated my argument for removing share-alike requirements on
> the
> >> creative output of other people. you clearly don't think it is "good".
> ;-)
> >
> > Rendering a map is about a creative as mapping a village, so no I see
> > no value added  by combining a stylesheet with "geodata". The product
> > of that process is probably always copyrightable even though there is
> > no creative process in it.
> mapping a village is a matter of recording the accurate positions of
> features and, while it certainly requires skill and intelligence, it
> doesn't require creativity (or we wouldn't be hearing lawyers saying our
> license doesn't work).
> combining a stylesheet with geodata, as you say, requires no creativity.
> in many cases it's as simple as running a program, which RichardF
> already demonstrated isn't a creative activity.
> *creating* a stylesheet is a very creative process, requiring judgement
> and skill to balance the colours, line styles, iconography and
> typography over various scales. have a go at it, it's harder than it
> looks ;-)

So you don't even want to license *creative* works under CC BY-SA?  Makes
your argument that OSM shouldn't use CC BY-SA because it's broken for data,
a bit thin.  You're really opposed to anything free except the poor suckers
who contribute.  They get nothing back.

How the hell did OSMF let someone with views like yours onto the LWG in the
first place?  You really don't represent the views of the community.

> > Without the work of all contributors there wouldn't be any map, and if
> > you don't value that enough to license a rendering of my map in a way
> > that I can use it then you are a leech, and I don't see why I should
> > let you use my map.
> that's part of the question we're asking in the survey. personally, i'm
> happy to let people do what they like with their own creative output
> (providing they attribute OSM), but i understand that your view is
> different.
> let's say i spend a huge amount of time creating a new font, a new icon
> set and a style which pulls them all together in harmony. you're saying
> that if i want to use OSM data then i have to give all of those things
> away, since they're part of the rendering?
> i did spend a while creating an icon set and i put it in the public
> domain because i felt that was the best thing to do, but i would defend
> other people's choice not to.
> >> what is important to me is that the geodata itself remain
> >> usable, open and free.
> >
> > That is important, sadly many people are not bothered by their data
> > being entered into closed databases.
> maybe they're only concerned about getting the rendered map? google map
> maker, for example, is a "free" map (free of cost), but you don't get
> access to the data.
> >>> it has always been about the creativity in
> >>> creating a map and the biggest product of this is the rendered map.
> >> that's your point of view, but i've always felt that the data is far
> more
> >> important than the map for two reasons; i can recreate the map from the
> >> data, and a lot of effort goes into creating a really good map which i
> think
> >> should be rewarded.
> >
> > The data is completely useless without a rendered map, unless you are
> > an anal retentive packrat, and it's ok I like collecting data as much
> > as I like making maps. But when I actually have to use them it's good
> > to know that people will share their progress in using your anal
> > retentiveness so that it's actually useful.
> i think the new nominatim geocoder is very useful, and it doesn't use a
> rendered map. the various OSM routing applications, garmin and navit
> downloads don't use a rendered map and they're very useful. i'm sure the
> mapnik, t at h and other OSM cartographers will continue to provide their
> tiles under a usable license, not because they have to but because they
> want to.
> > I know very few people that can recreate the map, you and Frederik
> > might both be able but very few people can.
> i'm not sure i understand your point. you've said that the data being
> free and open is important, but that it's useless without a rendered
> map. you've said that creating a rendered map isn't a creative activity,
> but that very few people can do it.
> i think that the number of sites out there rendering OSM data shows that
> many people can do it, and the range of their cartography shows the
> creativity and skill they're employing to do it, for example many of the
> sites listed here
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/List_of_OSM_based_Services
> cheers,
> matt
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20091207/1df3bc82/attachment.html>

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list