[Openstreetmap] Re: OSM License and debian

[Petter Reinholdtsen]

[Jon Stockill]
> The DFSG doesn't have a particularly fantastic record when applied
> to documentation and data - they decided the RFCs were non free
> after all.

What is your definition of free documentation?  One that can be shared
without cost?  Or one where the user can modify it and publish the
modified version?  I believe the Debian definition require the latter.

> CC would seem to be the ideal license for this type of information.

How come?

I want the OSM maps to be freely available, modifiable and
distributable.  I would prefer their license to require users
distributing modified versions to allow us to use their modifications
in our maps, but I do not believe it is very important to do so, as
part of the advantage of OSM will be the fact that we are a central
location with all the map data collected in an organized way.  On the
other hand, I believe it is important that we make sure it is
impossible to hijack the data, and suddenly turn it into a commercial
service.  I remember with sadness the story of cddb, where lots of
people had contributed and suddenly the "owner" of the database
decided to make the database commercial.  Because of this, we need to
make sure the complete database is easily available for download, and
that it is fairly easy to set up a competing OSM-like system.

I welcome commercial use of the OsM data, because I want to increase
the user of geo-referenced information.  I hope that increased
awareness of the advantages of geo-referenced will convince decision
makers to make the databases of the national mapping agencies
available at no or low cost because this will improve the service
level and productivity of the society as a whole.