Fwd: [OSM-talk] BSD/CC-by/LGPL vs. SharedAlike - decide now and forever
chebuctonian at gmail.com
Tue Mar 21 14:55:23 GMT 2006
On 3/21/06, Rev Simon Rumble <simon at rumble.net> wrote:
> On 21/3/2006, "Colin Mackay" <colin.mackay at gmail.com> wrote:
> >Take for example a non-profit organisation (say a charity) who does research
> >in the public interest/to promote their cause. They want to use the OSM
> >data, for obvious reasons, and have no choice but to license Government
> >census data. They want to put out a publication with the census data on a
> >map. What you are saying is they cannot, so they have to also license the
> >map data, at great additional expense, from the government instead of using
> >that money to save lives/care for needy/provide aid to disaster areas etc.
> If they were done as layers, in the way that gpsvisualizer.com does its
> SVG layers, it wouldn't really be a merging of the data, no? Of
> course, the new layer must not be _derived_ from the OSM data, just
> layered over the top.
> Using the charity case is somewhat disingenous. You'll notice that the
> GNU guys are very clear that they reject licenses that enable
> restrictions against "organization type x" and granting privileges to
> "organization type y".
We're not talking the GPL here, but the CC-By-SA. We can't allow a use
for a non-profit and ban if for commercial enterprise. In most
countries where census data is copyrighted under an incompatible
license, non-profits are effectively unable to create maps with OSM
data. I'm thinking of Anatole France, "The Law, in its majestic
equality, forbids the rich, as well as the poor, to sleep under the
Your point about SVG layers is a good one. This is how we should be
thinking of maps. Why should this change the moment we send a jpg to a
browser, whose layers were combined server-side rather than
client-side? What about distributing a report in a PDF, or god forbid,
printing it on paper?
More information about the talk