[OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

Chris Browet cbro at semperpax.com
Mon Aug 30 10:36:03 BST 2010


On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:13, Nathan Edgars II <neroute2 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> To me, the primary benefit of a free license is that the project has a
> 'life
> of its own' beyond the host: if the host decides to stop hosting it, or
> letting people edit, someone else can continue it as it had been. I don't
> care about the viral effects of such a license except insofar as they
> ensure
> that the project can't be 'locked-up' if enough people want it to continue.
>

I think this is an argument for Public Domain.

As far as I understand the licenses, nobody is permitted to fork the OSM
data without permissions, and it is thus not truly "open":
- with CC-BY-SA, you'd have to ask every contributor the permission to fork
their data (or is only attribution needed? To whom then? The individual
contributors?)
- with ODbL, you'd have to ask OSMF, which will be the "owner" of the data.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.

- Chris -
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100830/25d665c1/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list