[OSM-talk] Community vs. Licensing

[Simon Ward]

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:36:03AM +0200, Chris Browet wrote:
> 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.

That’s the whole idea of having a licence:  Without a licence, you would
have to ask for permission.  A licence explicitly gives permission
(providing certain conditions are met), so if you you can work within
the licence you already have permission.  If you want to do anything the
licence does not give permission for, then you would have to ask.

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100830/aa3e2b2d/attachment.pgp>