[Openstreetmap] Best way to licence data - CC or MIT/X11?

[Matt Amos]

On Monday 21 February 2005 18:23, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
> How does openstreetmap intend to licence its data? For my Freemap
> project, I was originally intending to licence the data (e.g. in
> XML form) using the Creative Commons licences but someone on the
> uk.comp.os.linux newsgroup pointed out that it would make the data
> incompatible with the GPL, and thus it would be impossible to
> include the data with a GPL application which made use of it.

we were thinking CC with SA clauses. as i understand it the data could 
be distributed however you like, with GPL software or in a separate 
"data" package.

a lot of this data is best served online and not distributed, as the 
whole data set is likely to become very large in the future.

> So I'm thinking of the MIT or X11 licence (basically the same
> thing) which is a non-copyleft free software licence. This would
> allow the Freemap data itself to remain free but for commercial
> people to develop proprietary works based on it.

we'd like to ensure that derivatives of the mapping data are also 
free, e.g: if someone adds wifi hotspot, traffic signage or other 
meta-data they'd have to contribute that.

on the other hand, if someone wants to make print copies of the OSM 
data or include it with a GPS unit then we're fine with that.

we could always dual-license CC+SA & GPL, which would be OK, as the 
GPL is more restrictive than the CC+SA. this would solve the 
packaging issue.

cya,

matt
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20050221/5566f6a2/attachment.pgp>