On Sat, May 30, 2009 at 01:47:12PM +0200, Marc Wick wrote: > > >Do you think that ODbL is a suitable license for geospatial data? Does > >it meet your needs? > > Definitely not. Data is either open or share-alike. It cannot be both. > Share-alike data is NOT open. It is a serious restriction that prevents > innovation and most interesting use cases from the beginning. It also > makes users vulnerable to any kind of lawsuits. > > Don't get me wrong. Everybody has the right to protect their data, but > they should not call it open if they want to prevent others from using it. >
This sounds like a classic "Viral" vs "Non-viral" discussion -- the same one in Open Source code would be BSD vs. GPL. Is it your reasoning that the GPL is not 'open'? If so, then your point here seems to be contrary to the point of the discussion. SA enforces certain restrictions -- as does "Attribution". Saying that a license isn't open unless a user can do whatever they want with it -- essentially, that only Public Domain is 'open' -- seems silly and a counterproductive point in this discussion. Regards, -- Christopher Schmidt MetaCarta _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
