I have heard and read some describe OSM as 'data'. I usually remain on the sidelines as an observer, but Richard W.'s comment reminded me of something I have thought more than once. OSM is open data, but I think that is an inadequate definition, because it is much more than that. It is a "community of open data contributors" as well. In my view, share-alike is an integral requirement for joining the community. Without it is certainly conceivable that the data would grow bigger and better, but I can also envision how dropping the requirement would eventually lead to the demise of the community. However, I do not think it's a case of data on the one hand and community on the other. They are the same hand. And, so I think it is important to remember the community, which is largely a silent bunch. It's the community that brought OSM to the big data dance... On Apr 29, 2014 11:52 AM, "Richard Weait" <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Luis Villa <[email protected]> wrote: > > [ ... ] > > But it is a reality that [ fear of a Share Alike obligation(?)]* slows, > > or in some cases stops, adoption of/contribution to OSM. > > Slows contribution to OpenStreetMap? That sounds incorrect to me. > ODbL and particularly Share Alike _encourage_ contribution to > OpenStreetMap. > > One very simple way to be sure you are Sharing Alike is to make your > improvements to the OpenStreetMap data first, then consume and reuse > the data. That's probably the ideal consumer of OpenStreetMap data; > the consumer who shares their improvements first then consumes the > data unchanged. And it is a rock solid, dead simple way to meet your > Share Alike obligations. > > Does avoidance of Share Alike obligations reduce adoption of > OpenStreetMap data? Perhaps it does reduce adoption by those who have > decided to not improve the OpenStreetMap data by sharing their > potential improvements. Those who could improve OpenStreetMap data > but who chose not to do so are excluding themselves from participating > fully in the OpenStreetMap community. > > That is their choice. > > We as OpenStreetMap contributors see "improving the data" as a core value. > > * I hope that I have parsed your intent correctly, Luis. The > paragraph I trimmed also discussed copyright case law and lack of case > law for "substantial" in this context. > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
