On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 20:29 +1000, Ian Sergeant wrote: > I'm not objecting to freedom of data. The comment I objected to is > the one that said if it is good enough for the Australian government, > then it must be good enough for all Australians, with no need to > examine it further. That may be valid as someone's opinion, but to > say it is the opinion of all Australians is just plainly false.
It doesnt have to match the opinion of all Australians, as long as it matches the opinions of those who matter and would be deciding on these things (copyright lawyers, judges, etc). > I always thought that in Australia we question our government's > decisions, we don't always accept what they are doing is in the > national best interest. They have given away valuable data under an internationally used licence. How is it not in the best interest? > I'm sure they have considered the available licensing options, and > given the current state of the law and licensing have given it their > best shot. The government has a different decision making basis to > what OSM does. I imagine there are more lawyers and legal advisors in the Australian government than there are involved in OSM too. Heck, even just within some departments like ABS Im sure the legal numbers and minds outweigh the OSM collective legal knowledge. > I'm not arguing for any particular licencing outcome. If you want to > have that discussion, I'm sure you can find someone who feels more > strongly on the issue than I do. Im arguing for an outcome which is compatible with as many users as possible and that people already know and understand and have tested. Im also arguing for an outcome which wouldnt see the complete splintering of the project in the long-term. David _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
