On 22 November 2010 11:31, Ian Sergeant <[email protected]> wrote: > It is hard to believe that those red cities and towns are created entirely > from data that can't be relicenced.
Take me as an example. I don't care what licence we use - as far as I'm concerned all my work can be PD. If people want to take things I've done, modify them and don't give them back, I don't care. A lot of people seem to, but as long as my stuff is still available, I don't see the problem. I already do similar things with Project Gutenberg - books that I've worked on there and are available for free are sold to idiots for money. The book is still available for free, that's the important bit. But I cannot agree to the new CT's in the format they are now. Any personal work I've done, not a problem. But I've used sources that were compatible with CC_BY-SA, and are compatible afaik with ODBL. But the CT's say that anything I give them now can later be changed to any other licence, which they may not be compatible with, and I can't say at that point say wait - this needs to come out. As I read it, that means that nobody can, under the CT's, use any source that is not PD, because that's all that's going to be safe no matter what happens in the future. I haven't done anything as much as Liz, but my fingerprints are all over SE QLD, as well as other parts of Australia, the Pacific and Africa. All of that is going to have to stay red or yellow unless something changes, including all the stuff I did by GPS survey. There's no way I've got the ability to sort it all out at this stage. Stephen _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
