On Sat 2017-12-09 20:12:33, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> On 09.12.2017 18:19, Pavel Machek wrote:
> > So you are proposing a system where we can't even import ODbL licensed data?
> 
> Indeed. Although it's not really a new proposal, I'm just finally acting
> on an issue that has been known and documented for a long time.

Actually no, I do not think agreement on that issue exists. Best I
could find on the wiki that ODbL-only is a concern when importing.

> > That's pretty stupid, right?
> 
> No. If it seems counter-intuitive, that's only because of the simple,
> but incomplete narrative that "OSM switched to the ODbL". What actually
> happened was that mappers were asked to accept the Contributor Terms.

Actually that narrative was complete, at least for some accounts.

> Those terms grant the OSMF the right to publish the database as either
> CC-BY-SA or ODbL+DbCL (or both at the same time). And this same document
> also describes a mechanism for adding more licenses to that list in the
> future. It's not an afterthought, but an integral part of the compromise
> that was achieved back then, and it's based on the painful lessons we
> learned in the process.

And there will be more painful lessons if OSMF is stupid enough to try
to mess with licensing in future. 

                                                                        Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) 
http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

_______________________________________________
Imports mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports

Reply via email to