[talk-au] Irony...

Andrew Harvey andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com
Mon Jul 11 10:48:37 BST 2011

They do allow OSM to trace their imagery, or anyone else for that
matter. So long as traced data is licensed under CC-BY-SA. It is the
OSMF/OSM whom chooses that this license isn't suitable and whom won't
accept the data.

As for this choice, i.e. why nearmap insists over CC-BY-SA rather that
CC0 (as I doubt anything short of CC0 isn't acceptable to OSMF/OSM),
this is the whole non-copyleft v copyleft (BSD v GPL) debate. I don't
know what's best and I keep changing my mind on what I think is best.
On one hand non-copyleft (i.e. licensing so tracing is compatible with
the current OSM) seems freeer as there are less restrictions, on the
other hand copyleft (i.e. the current CC-BY-SA licensing scheme) means
in theory there should be more work in the commons (i.e. forces those
who would rather a proprietary license for their tracings to put them
in the commons for the benefit of everyone).

FOSM has more data for Australia than OSM so nearmap may choose to use
FOSM data rather than OSM data for their street layer (if they still
choose to use such a layer, because given their current direction they
seem to be moving away from this audience...)

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 6:59 PM, Matt White <mattwhite at iinet.com.au> wrote:
> Is it just me, or is there a certain amount of irony in Nearmap not allowing
> OSM to use their aerials to trace from, but being quite happy to use OSM as
> their street layer?
> (Don't get me wrong - I think Nearmap have a very tidy product, but it's
> just a pity that a compromise couldn't be worked out.)

More information about the Talk-au mailing list