[talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-dev] To OSM editor authors ...

John Smith deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com
Thu Apr 7 01:37:11 BST 2011


On 7 April 2011 10:31, Alex (Maxious) Sadleir <maxious at gmail.com> wrote:
> Surely that's a simple procedural matter then (CT 1.2.4 already has

It always has been, but as others have pointed out, control of the
process has gone on largely without proper consultation and feedback
to better shape what mappers want.

> the "we reserve the right to delete your content for whatever
> reason"), especially when changes through the NearMap editor can be

Unfortunately the language used as part of that clause isn't strong
enough, they may decide it's too difficult and they can't be bothered
to remove it.

> If LWG can negotiate special conditions
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/d/d8/Bing_license.pdf) with
> Bing, surely they can work something out with NearMap.

It seems to me that they don't want to do anything that would limit
them from moving to PD in future.

> I wouldn't want to get into a situation where you have to negotiate
> with every service/data provider (that's the point of open data
> licencing!) but a company that covers more area than some european
> countries to the community for free deserves a fair go.

That isn't the problem since most projects have always used fixed
license conditions, eg linux kernel will always be GPL based, in fact
it's only commercial companies that require you to hand over all
rights like the CTs demand.



More information about the Talk-au mailing list