[OSM-talk] What could we do to make this licences discussion more inclusive?

[SteveC]

On Jul 18, 2010, at 8:18 PM, John Smith wrote:

> On 19 July 2010 04:11, SteveC <steve at asklater.com> wrote:
>> The companies I talk to today come down in to two camps on PD. The first basically lick their lips and want us to go PD so they don't have to contribute anything (in effect make their business easier) and the second think it would be nuts because then the project wouldn't have long term growth potential and would probably die and fragment like BSD did etc etc etc.
> 
> I'm not talking about end users of the data, but companies suppling
> either aerial imagery or other data, like AND for example, how would
> they feel if all attribution was stripped from their contributions to
> OSM?

Okay - you're saying that nearmap's concern is attribution?

Here's another scenario - You could say to nearmap that when we switch over to odbl they switch off the aerial imagery but allow us to keep using the data so far under the odbl. When things have settled down in X number of months and they see we're not going to jump license again any time soon then they can start letting us use the imagery again?

Steve

stevecoast.com