[OSM-talk] Suggestion to add SA clause to CT section 3, describing "free and open license"

[Michael Barabanov]

Frederik (and Steve, and LWG),

Rather than receiving questions back, some actual answers to direct
questions about adding SA-like requirement to CT would be nice.

Regarding the questions: taking NearMap as an example (copied from another
thread, see there for more details):

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Ben Last <ben.last at nearmap.com> wrote:

> On 19 July 2010 13:48, Michael Barabanov <michael.barabanov at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Would specifying that the new license must be not just open/free but
>> specifically an SA-like license in contributor agreement solve this
>> particular issue?  ODBL looks like SA in spirit.  Further changing of
>> licenses could be a separate discussion, when/if there's a new need
>
>
> I believe that as long as the licence must be share-alike (for a given
> definition of "share-alike"), that should work, yes.  Seems to me also that
> would address the concerns of a number of other contributors to the
> discussion, but I don't pretend to have followed in the exhaustive detail to
> know if the LWP had a good reason not to write it that way from the start :)
>
> Cheers
> b
>
> --
> Ben Last
> Development Manager (HyperWeb)
> NearMap Pty Ltd
>

NearMap looks quite important for Australia.

Michael.

On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> Peteris Krisjanis wrote:
>
>> Ok, there it goes: I suggest to add SA clause and Attribution clause
>> as requirement for any new open and free license in CT point 3. It
>> would help to ease problems with big data contributors which could
>> agree with ODBL (as it still have SA and Attribution), but are uneasy
>> about clarification of point 3 in CT.
>>
>
> 1. Who are these big data contributors?
>
> 2. Is it clear that they have issues with the CT or are you only guessing?
>
> 3. Is it clear that these issues will vanish by what you propose or are you
> only guessing?
>
> 4. Is their contribution so important to OSM that OSM will let them decide
> what licenses are acceptable for us?
>
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100719/5f0ed632/attachment.html>