On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 11:42 PM, SteveC <st...@asklater.com> wrote: > Of course they said that, they only support PD-like licenses *as a policy*. >
PD-like licenses? You mean for databases of facts? Or am I misinterpreting "PD-like"? It's pretty stupid but that's their policy. > Well, you may think Creative Commons is "stupid", but I hope others will give them a chance and listen to what they have to say. I think they will, considering that Creative Commons is well known and respected, compared to Open Data Commons, who doesn't even seem to have an article on Wikipedia. I don't know, I find it somewhat mind-boggling that a site like OSM would even consider resorting to "browse-through license agreements" in order to impose terms which go beyond that of copyright. It's the exact oppose of what I'd expect from a site which calls itself "open" and "free".
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
