[OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap License Change Phase 3 Pre-Announcement

[Ed Avis]

Richard Fairhurst <richard <at> systemed.net> writes:

>>What's not clear is how the ODbL+DbCL licence would help this 
>>situation. It would at least straightforwardly permit the publishing 
>>of map tiles without any attribution or share-alike requirement
>
>Disagree. (This has been gone over ad nauseam on legal-talk, I'm just
>pointing it out here for the record.)

Sorry, I didn't mean to spread misinformation.  Oh well, this was the one big
advantage of ODbL as far as I could see :-(.  So do the produced map tiles (a
Produced Work under the ODbL, I think, or am I mistaken there to?) have to be
distributed under the ODbL also - or can you use any distribution terms as long
as it has attribution - or what?

(I'd rather not *discuss* these legal niceties here on this list but if you could
forward the official word on these matters it would help.  It is a pity that it's
not completely idiot-proof and obvious from the licence text itself.)

-- 
Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com>