>Let me explain a little more why I think the question of 'could this data be added to OSM?' is relevant.
As I see it, one intention of the ODbL, and other copyleft licences such as CC-BY-SA or the GPL, is to form a 'commons' where different works can be combined and mixed. In the case of the ODbL the aim is to make sure data and databases can be reused and combined. This is explained in the Open Data Commons site at <http://www.opendatacommons.org/faq/>: >It's crucial because open data is so much easier to break-up and recombine, to >use and reuse. We therefore want people to have incentives to make their data >open and for open data to be easily usable and reusable — i.e. for open data to >form a 'commons'. A good definition of openness acts as a standard that >ensures >different open datasets are 'interoperable' and therefore do form a commons. Similar reasoning underpins the CC share-alike licences and the GPL. However, under the proposed licence change and contributor terms, OSM would not be able to participate fully in this commons. Although the ODbL would allow others to take the OSM data and combine it with other ODbL or permissive-licensed data sources, the OSM project could not do likewise. Without extra permission, we could not incorporate ODbL data into our map, even if it had been derived from OSM in the first place. -- Ed Avis <e...@waniasset.com> _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
