[OSM-talk] A super quick poll

Bernt M. Johnsen berntm at gmail.com
Mon Nov 3 09:49:22 GMT 2008


2008/11/3 OJ W <ojwlists at googlemail.com>:
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 7:59 AM, Joseph Gentle <josephg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> The public domain will benefit OSM.
>
> What incentive would anyone have to add datasets to OSM if it were PD?
>  Surely it would be easier and less risky for them to keep their own
> work in a separate database and combine it with OSM later so they get
> a better map than everyone else, hence competitive advantage. Why
> would they bother to share their work unnecessarily?
>
> Sharealike at least rewards people who create free data, by allowing
> them access to more.  At the very least it isn't structured to
> discourage* generation of free data
>
> In this case, it isn't the 'PD license' itself but copyright law which
> encourages selfish behaviour, and by pretending that nobody else cares
> about copyright, PD shows itself as naive.


If you were right, the Apache Foundation with all it's software would
be a failure. How is it then, that the Apache web server is the most
successful webserver ever? With the Apache license, I could keep my
enhancements to myself and then get a competitive atvantage according
to your logic. And it might be that some do that, but most see the
advantage in contributing to the community. I admit that data and
software is somewhat different, but I don't think your logic holds at
all. Choosing between a SA-type and PD-type license should not be
governed by religious beliefs, but what you want to achieve. And there
are reasons for both. And I don't think openstreetmap will die of the
"wrong type" is used. Just evolve in a different way.

>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>



-- 
Bernt Marius Johnsen




More information about the talk mailing list