> Let's not kid ourselves here. The overwhelming number of commercial OSM users are not driven by a motivation to help us, but by a motivation to save money (or perhaps a motivation to escape a monopolist's clutch but that boils down to the same).
Frederik, saving money is not the point, it's all about having great data that is supported by a community. Every day I'm talking to commercial companies interested in _paying_ Mapbox because they truly believe we have the best map (power by OpenStreetMap), and the people at these companies believe in a future of open data where the map continues to grow thanks to being open. Mapbox is working with companies from foursquare to Pinterest to the Financial Times to VK.com (https://www.mapbox.com/showcase). These few sites alone are used by hundreds of millions of people looking at beautiful OpenStreetMap data, and location and thus the map, is critical for each app. Accuracy is what matters, not skimping on a few $. We have dozens of large companies like this that would love to more tightly integrate their internal data with OSM via goecoding, but because of unclear guidelines are blocked. On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 2:52 PM, Alex Barth <a...@mapbox.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote: > >> If you apply this to your above example, the addresses would be subject >> to SA (however no further information), and while potentially one could >> infer that these are likely the addresses of the store locations, no >> further information would needed to be disclosed*. >> > > So I think I follow: in a database of store locations [1], where > coordinates have been added through OSM-based geocoding, only the > coordinates (latitude/longitude pairs) from OpenStreetMap are subject to > share alike. The store names, street names, house numbers, etc. wouldn't be > subject to share alike, they didn't come through the OSM-based geocoder - > nor any coordinates that haven't been added through the OSM-based geocoder. > > While this reading is better than the uncertainty we have now it is not > practical beyond well informed users. To appropriately handle geocoding > under this practice, a geocoder application would not only have to expose > on a granular level where data was sourced from [2] - but a geocoder user > would have to store this information in a granular way to be able to > release data appropriately. > > [1] Chain Retailer example (number 1): > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Geocoding_-_Guideline > [2] Assuming a complex geocoder with a fallback to appropriate third party > data. > > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > >
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
