[OSM-talk] licence plan - Question about supplying own data

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Matt Amos wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Dave Stubbs <osm.list at randomjunk.co.uk> wrote:
>> Your 8 year old kids would be obliged to license their butterfly
>> data under the ODbL [1] and attribute OSM.
>>
>> [1] Ignoring potential bug in 0.9 draft
> 
> its not a bug, its a feature ;-)

Well... a feature that would allow Google to assimilate our minutely 
diffs into their giant database where they mix it with TeleAtlas and 
Navteq data to provide tiles that display the "best of three worlds" and 
neither share the tiles nor anything in between.

That "feature" is something that was introduced without so much as a 
word from anyone between the April 2008 and the 0.9 drafts. If this were 
intentional, then someone had to hang for trying to deceive the 
community. And I would personally tie the rope because I have tirelessly 
advocated ODbL to anyone who was stupid enough to ask me by saying that 
we let go of Produced Works and replace this with demands made on 
interim derived databases that would never see the light of day under 
CC-BY-SA. But... cockup rather than conspiracy.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"