[OSM-talk] Data Licencing

[Ben Gimpert]

On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 11:24:14AM +0100, Ian Davis wrote:
> I understand the argument and it would be a good situation if the maps 
> were considered to be creative works. I have a few doubts though. My 
> reasoning is this: how many different ways are there to interpret the 
> GPX data into a map? If you gave the GPX data to five different people 
> and they created maps in isolation, how different would they be? How 
> much creative interpretation is involved?

IANAL.

There's a distinction to be made here between (just) drawing ways atop
the GPX-derived breadcrumbs, and drawing a *map* atop the GPX-derived
breadcrumbs.  Here I intend "map" to include street names and
cartographic decisions about line capping, fonts, etc.  (See the
OSM-in-SVG discussions.)

In the first case, there's probably a good argument for no originality.
But in the cartographic case, there is most certainly originality
contributed.  One of the classic map-making fallacies is assuming the
work does not involve strongly arbitrary (read, "aesthetic") decisions.

I also agree that an "osm-legal" list would make sense, since I usually
avoid licensing debates like the plague.  Usually.

		Ben