[Openstreetmap] The license of choice for OpenStreetmap.org? (Was: European Roads?)

[Frank Mohr]

Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> [Frank Mohr]
> 
>>I think "CC-BY-SA" and DFSG are compatible.
> 
> 
> Some people don't agree with you. :/
> 
> I'm not up to date on the current status, but know the CC people are
> in touch with some Debian people to try to resolve the issue.
> 
> Legalese isn't my area of interest, but I did a quick Google search to
> see if I could find some info, and came up with
> <URL:http://people.debian.org/~evan/ccsummary.html>.

at least the first CC-related restriction that's criticised makes sense
for map data

# The above clause allows a licensor to prohibit modified versions that 
# mention them or reference them.

lets assume someone takes the data set, builds in some faults and 
redistributes them with reference to the original author.

> So, I guess a question to answer is; do we want Debian to be able to
> include the maps produced by this project in their archive?  I do.
> What about the rest of you?  If the answer is yes, we should select a
> license that is compatible with DFSG.

for me the answer is yes ..

there are seeral solutions:
- dual license GPL or CC

- CC-licensed data sets in the "non-free" tree
   while the related software is in main or contrib

   example for this: amoeba (contrib) <-> amoeba-data (non-free)

- provide just a download package, that fetches the data from somewhere
   else. This package might also keep a local data copy uptodate.

   example: msttcorefonts (contrib)


Frank