Christoph. > Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2019 um 12:03 Uhr > Von: "Christoph Hormann" <chris_horm...@gmx.de> > > This is definitely a better approach than trying to find loopholes in > the license with brute force and wishful thinking. Even if that is > possible and you can present an interpretation of the wording of the > ODbL that supports your use case without share-alike this was clearly > not the intention of the OSM community when adopting the ODbL to do so.
It never was my intention to brute force a hole. I just thought, OSM data can be used, as long I don't mix anything or fill my missing data. I thought, proper attribution like "selected by using OSM data ..." would be fine for your. > > I didn't expected OpenStreetMap to be such non-free and permissive > > :-( > > The usual view is that share-alike provisions do not make something > non-free or non-open because they are meant to protect and extend the > freedom and only constrain users of truly non-free data. But anyone > can have a different opinion on that of course. Sorry to say this, but I don't feel like you want to protect your data. It feels like you want to grab all the data, your data comes into contact with. "Viral" is the right term here - do you know the Borg? :-) > Both share-alike and attribution play an important role in OSM in the > social contract between mappers and data users. In return for being > able to use the results of the work of the mappers for free, data users > are required to share improvements of the data or the results of > producing something of additional value in combination with other data > under open license terms. If attribution would pay a role, than "(c) Non-Free data, selected by using OSM data ..." would be possible. That might be an idea for future license drafts. Regards, Matthias _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
