[OSM-talk] opendata diagram

[Pavel Melnikov]

My point was, I thought there are many more open licenses than listed in
the picture.
On Sep 3, 2012 10:47 AM, "Paul Norman" <penorman at mac.com> wrote:

> Non-commercial only licenses discriminate against fields of endeavor and
> are definitely not open. See 6 of http://opensource.org/docs/osd or 8 of
> http://opendefinition.org/okd/. No derivative licenses are also not open
> – you can’t modify the data.****
>
> ** **
>
> Another explanation is
> http://freedomdefined.org/Permissible_restrictions#Restrictions_which_are_not_permissible.
> CC doesn’t claim that any NC or ND license is open either.****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Pavel Melnikov [mailto:positron96 at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Sunday, September 02, 2012 8:31 PM
> *To:* Simone Aliprandi
> *Cc:* talk at openstreetmap.org
> *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk] opendata diagram****
>
> ** **
>
> Forgive my incompetence, but what about other open licenses? Say,
> CC-non-commercial, Cc-no-derivatives, and a whole bunch of combinations of
> by, sa, nc, nd? Em you consider them not-open?
> I'm sure there are more examples, I only know about cc ones.****
>
> On Sep 3, 2012 3:04 AM, "Simone Aliprandi" <simone.aliprandi at gmail.com>
> wrote:****
>
> I realized a diagram including all the most important opendata
> licenses that are now available, and classifying them according to
> their legal effects (attribution and share-alike, attribution only,
> public domain). I hope this work can be useful to better understand
> the actual situation of geodata (open)licensing:
> http://aliprandi.blogspot.it/2012/05/opendata-graph.html
> Bye,
> --
> Simone Aliprandi - http://www.aliprandi.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20120903/9a530a2d/attachment.html>