I strongly disagree with this argument. Perhaps others do too, and that's why
you're getting the resistance to sign the petition.
----- Original Message -----
From: paul perrin
To: mySociety public,general purpose discussion list
Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2009 11:11 PM
Subject: Re: [mySociety:public] Free Our Postcodes
Its called 'divide and conquer' - the supporters of freeing postcodes are
divided, so they are already conquered...
I think commercial and non-commercial should never be mixed - people are
people they matter, companies are just convenient affectations they have no
rights, just legal allowances.
Personally I could tolerated taxpayer funded data being made available for
commercial use but only if derived work also became public domain too - if
someone is making a profit (taking money off the public) they can't expect the
public to *give* then the things they are selling back...
Paul /)/+)
2009/10/10 Ian Eiloart <[email protected]>
On 10 Oct 2009, at 16:58, Jonathan Hogg wrote:
> On 10 Oct 2009, at 16:09, Ian Eiloart wrote:
>
>> Just sign it. We'll work on the other half later. Don't let
>> perfection
>> be the enemy of the good.
>
> Having thought about it a bit more I have decided that in fact I
> won't. Two other messages on this list have expressed my concern quite
> well:
>
FFS, if we can't get the strongest supporters of postcode freedom to
support this, then we won't get anywhere.
Why not start a petition to completely free the postcode, and sign both?
> On 10 Oct 2009, at 13:42, Richard wrote:
>
>> I just feel it hands RM a quick and easy PR 'getout' on a platter -
>> while prolonging the pain for everyone else.
>
> and:
>
> On 10 Oct 2009, at 15:21, Dan Brickley wrote:
>
>> I'd prefer to stick with the simpler message, that the data should be
>> public and free for all to use. And if it helps anyone make money, so
>> much the better. Once it's half-free and the nonprofits are happy,
>> it'll be much harder to keep the pressure on for it to be completely
>> opened up.
>
> I agree that getting a non-profit exemption will make it harder to
> campaign for fully opening the database for any use. In particular, if
> we go to the bother of lobbying MPs on the issue we shouldn't lobby
> for a half-measure as they are unlikely to listen again if we come
> back and ask for more.
>
> The right thing to campaign for is for it to be fully opened; not
> because I'm a "data wants to be free" tree-hugger, but because I
> believe it is the right thing to do economically: the current system
> enriches a pseudo-public corporation at the expense of impoverishing
> the wider economy. I think this is a message that can be understood by
> MPs.
>
> With the current public debt situation, anything that increases GDP is
> a good thing.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list [email protected]
> Archive, settings, or unsubscribe:
>
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
--
Ian Eiloart
_______________________________________________
Mailing list [email protected]
Archive, settings, or unsubscribe:
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Mailing list [email protected]
Archive, settings, or unsubscribe:
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public_______________________________________________
Mailing list [email protected]
Archive, settings, or unsubscribe:
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
