[OSM-talk] License

[A Morris]

I would have thought this situation would be considered a derivative work?
Is this not the general opinion?


On 1/31/07, Robert (Jamie) Munro <rjmunro at arjam.net> wrote:
>
> A Morris wrote:
> > I vote for keeping CC.
> >
> > I'm totally happy with my CC-licensed map data being used in proprietary
> > navigation systems, speed camera warning systems, printed maps sold in
> > shops, websites with adverts, etc, but when said vendor discovers a new
> > speed camera, I want them to be forced to add that speed camera back
> > into OSM.
> >
> > That simply won't happen if OSM is PD.
>
> It won't happen with CC either. That's not what the CC license says.
>
> It would be great to have an alternative license that does say something
> like that, though, but currently we can't. The foundation only have the
> data under CC, so they can't offer it under anything else.
>
> I've never advocated going public domain, just letting the foundation
> have a choice over future licensing, rather than fix ourselves to a
> single license now, particularly as that license is incompatible with
> npemaps postcode collection system.
>
> Robert (Jamie) Munro
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20070131/bee5792f/attachment.html>