I don't understand this objection. If a company accidentally publishes
something that's a problem with their procedures, not any license (free or
proprietary).
On 23 September 2015 15:32:06 GMT-07:00, Alex Barth <a...@mapbox.com> wrote:
>On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote:
>
>> it might actually force
>> such a service provider to differentiate between geo-coding for
>public
>> vs in-house use.
>>
>
>This suggestion has come up before and I'd like to flag that this is
>impractical. No organization would and should take the risk that a
>potential future (accidental) publication of a private OpenStreetMap
>based
>work could jeopardize sensitive data. The risk is significant as even
>the
>publication of a Produced Work can bring the share alike stipulations
>of
>the ODbL to bear.
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>legal-talk mailing list
>legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
