[Osmf-talk] CC-BY-SA "too strong" ?

Simon Ward simon at bleah.co.uk
Sat Dec 12 13:07:12 UTC 2009

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 09:20:42AM +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> In their contributor terms, and indeed on every edit page, Wikipedia 
> makes you agree that a link back to the Wikipedia article is sufficient 
> attribution. (Actually it is a bit more complex still, see 
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Terms_of_Use.)
> OSM could do the same, but we'd have to put that in our own contributor 
> terms and it would only become valid for people signing up after that, 
> or we'd have to send everyone a notice to that effect and say "click 
> here to agree that in the future, a link to openstreetmap.org is 
> sufficient attribution for you" or so.

That’s very like the proposed process for transitioning to the ODbL :)

So, if we decided to stick with CC-by-sa on the data (I’m not saying we
should), but add on some contributor terms to iron out some of the major
issues with using CC-by-sa, we could.

A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20091212/3c5f221d/attachment.sig>

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list