On 10/07/2010 10:04 AM, Ed Avis wrote:
Rob Myers<r...@...> writes:
It also seems a bit like unnecessary licence proliferation.
That's only because it is.
They really should have used an ODC licence IMO.
If they had chosen a licence from Open Data Commons, apart from the public
domain
dedication, wouldn't it be incompatible with the proposed CTs?
The DbCL might be, but I had ODC-BY in mind and I think that you're
right that it wouldn't be compatible.
I'm coming to the conclusion that "individual contributor of original
data to OSM" and "institutional importer of a third party database"
should be treated differently, and possibly that OSM should do the
Debian thing of having different repositories for different classes of
resource. The end result can still be BY-SA map tiles...
- Rob.
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
