[OSM-talk] NY times article about Google maps and OSM

[Simon Poole]

Am 16.12.2013 00:27, schrieb nicholas.g.lawrence at tmr.qld.gov.au:
>
> > I did not see this linked on this list, so here you go:
> >
> > http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/15/magazine/googles-plan-for-global-
> > domination-dont-ask-why-ask-where.html?_r=0
>
> page 6 of 8, second paragraph
> "The O.S.M. map data is free now -
> but using it comes with a catch. Any
> improvement, or any change at all,
> that a developer makes to O.S.M.'s
> map must be sent back to O.S.M."
>
>
> Is this an accurate description of OSM's licensing?
>
Well no (assuming the author is actually referring to OSM data and not
the map tiles) .

The ODbL does have fairly strong share alike provisions and likely there
are some business models that  wont work well with OSM.  However even if
all the share alike provisions are activated (you've created a
derivative database and have publicly used it), you simply have to make
your derivative database available (with ODbL 1.0 licensing). You
definitely don't have to send us a copy, frankly we wouldn't know what
to do with such data if we got it :-). Non-public/internal use does not
trigger share alike in the first place.

Simon

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20131216/5f8f0ccf/attachment.html>