[OSM-talk] Why the BSD vs GPL debate is irrelevant to OSM

[Shalabh]

On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 10:54 PM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 2:53 AM, Peter Körner <osm-lists at mazdermind.de>wrote:
>
>> > E.g. I'd be happy to see things like Google use OSM data and mix it with
>> > any other source of data they can get their hands on, but only if
>> > improvements they make to the data (or they get from their customers)
>> > get fed back to OSM.
>>
>> How would you differentiate between edits that go to the OSM Data and
>> edits that go to "any other source"?
>>
>> When you're talking about mixing the data, I think of some kind of
>> layers. If a user now adds a POI, which layer is affected? Google could
>> just drop this POI into their own layer so that it never reaches the
>> OSM-Data? This way no improvements would have to go back.
>>
>
> Most likely that's possible under the ODbL, since that'd be a produced
> work.  I'm not sure if Google would try it or not, though, because the ODbL
> is pretty ambiguous.  From one account (which I haven't verified), there's
> already OSM data in Google Maps.
>
>
> Ok, heres a question I have been meaning to ask for long. What is the big
deal if the big, bad G takes a chunk of data from OSM and uses it? Do I
care? No. If anything, I would be happy that we created something worthy to
be used by a corporation. As long as they dont restrict me from using data
on OSM, which they in no way cant, I dont have a problem. If they dont 'give
back' to the community, big deal!! Any open source project anyway has lots
of free riders. I am a free rider on Joomla, I just cant contribute anything
there, I am inept at programming. I am sure there are people who just
download maps from OSM onto their navigators and never turn back to give
anything back. If they are not bad, why is Google so bad? And why is them
using the data bad?

Regards,
Shalabh
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20091211/e097e490/attachment.html>