[OSM-talk] OpenStreetMap Isn't All That Open, Let's Change That and Drop Share-Alike
sfkeller at gmail.com
Sat Mar 15 10:31:12 UTC 2014
2014-03-15 11:22 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> Do you know of any case where OSMF did more than write a letter?
Just being curious: Do you - or anybody else - know of any specific
case where G* wrote more than a letter?
2014-03-15 11:22 GMT+01:00 Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>:
>> Am 14/mar/2014 um 09:48 schrieb Norbert Wenzel <norbert.wenzel.lists at gmail.com>:
>> And to the topic. It might not always be easy to enforce the
>> share-alike clause, but I really like the fact that we have it and may
>> enforce it if necessary.
> actually it seems we won't enforce it upon people who don't follow the share alike provisions, probably not even the attribution obligations will be "enforced".
> Do you know of any case where OSMF did more than write a letter? Uses of osm without attribution are revealed every now and then but never has happened something (read: attempt to enforce the license) substantial whether they added attribution and declared share alike or not. e.g. MS could continue to distribute tainted aerials for months if not years, apple does so for at least 2 years, the wiki has a long but quite incomplete list of others: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/License_violation
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
More information about the talk