[Osmf-talk] ODbL switchover at SOTM, bad idea

Paul Norman penorman at mac.com
Tue Sep 4 02:49:24 UTC 2012

> From: Paul Norman [mailto:penorman at mac.com]
> Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2012 6:35 PM
> To: osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [Osmf-talk] ODbL switchover at SOTM, bad idea
> > From: Kai Krueger [mailto:kakrueger at gmail.com]
> >
> > If it is "only" a question of how data consumers have to deal with the
> > transition, then that can be solved by dual licensing the planet and
> > diffs both ODbL and CC-BY-SA for X weeks. That way those data
> > consumers who were e.g. already ready on the 1st April with their
> > transition strategy and legal review can use the ODbL straight away.
> > While those data consumers who don't start planning until the day of
> > transitioning still have enough time to figure out what their new
> > legal obligations are and gracefully transition to them.
> >
> > Imho there is no need to put unnecessary burden on data consumers by
> > having a hard cut over. If there is a delay anyway to wait for data
> > consumers to get their act together (which is not unreasonable), it
> > might as well be a dual licensed "delay period".
> +1 to this. This idea has been suggested multiple times without any
> +solid
> response and I am not aware of any alternate methods to deal with the
> issues of regenerating cached data.
> Even releasing the first planet as dual-licensed would work for many of
> the concerns. It would allow consumers to put off switching until
> *after* they had reloaded their databases and had a chance to recache
> data.

After talking with a few people I am convinced that this is no longer an

Also, as an aside someone could effectively get the last ODbL planet as CC
BY-SA by taking the last planet from August and applying diffs to it.

More information about the osmf-talk mailing list