[OSM-talk] License/CT issues: Let's not punish the world's disadvantaged, pls.

David Murn davey at incanberra.com.au
Thu Jun 23 01:16:15 BST 2011


On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 16:25 -0700, Steve Coast wrote:
> Well there's one other aspect which is there are chunks of data only 
> available to OpenStreetMap and nobody else.

Does the data exclusively available under the ODbL outweigh the data
exclusively available under CC?  Since not even OSM uses the ODbL yet, I
find it totally amazing that any other entity would be.

Also..

On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 16:35 -0700, Steve Coast wrote: 
> Why do you feel you have a liability?

Because I have used data from a source which cannot be relicenced.  Id
feel the same way if Id taken OSM data and put it into another external
project, which was then planning to change its licence and take the OSM
data along with it.

Personally, I dont have a liability as I was aware early enough that my
contributions couldnt be relicenced.  Unfortunately some people have
accepted the CTS without fully understanding that they didnt have the
rights to relicence the data.  The fact of having each individual user
accept contributor terms, means that effectively you have passed the
liability directly onto the user who contributed the 'offending' data
rather than the foundation who refuse to remove the data in the first
place.

David

> On 6/22/2011 4:22 PM, David Murn wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 21:17 +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> >
> >> I wonder what would happen if someone involved in running Google Map
> >> Maker were to post a similar message. "Hey, don't like how things go in
> >> OSM? Why not come to Google Map Maker where all license issues are solved!"
> > Except that
> >
> > a) Map Maker never had any compatability with any version of OSM
> > b) Users who used OSM for the past few years dont necessarily want
> > licence issues 'solved' (especially if the only difference they see is a
> > degraded map)
> > c) fosm isnt a wholey different project in the same way MapMaker is.
> > fosm is a copy of OSM, and the two will parallel each other until the
> > time that OSM splits off with a new licence change.  If you think of
> > fosm as the continuation and OSM as the fork with 'all licence issues
> > solved', youre more on-track to the situation
> >
> > The day after the changeover occurs, the world will look at OSM and fosm
> > and theyll see one is a small subset of the other, until the time that
> > the main OSM project can come close to making up for the data that has
> > had to be removed.  Joe user (especially Joe user who might use map
> > maker) doesnt give a rats about licence terms, all they care about is
> > seeing complete maps.
> >
> > David
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > talk mailing list
> > talk at openstreetmap.org
> > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk





More information about the talk mailing list