On Wed, 4 May 2011 20:29:22 +1000 Ian Sergeant <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 4/05/2011 5:18 PM, David Murn wrote: > > Well, I have yet to hear any Australians complain about the freedom > > of the data, other than being incompatible with the new > > one-of-a-kind licence that OSM is wanting to use. > > 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. In which case the comment is taken somewhat out of its context The start is the ODBL faction asserting that CC-by-SA is unsuitable for data, or proven unusable for data. The Commonwealth of Australia has assessed licences under which to release geographic data, and chosen initially CC-by-SA and then CC-by. I am aware that the bureaucracy is very slow in its movements and very conservative, and that the Commonwealth of Australia can afford as many lawyers as it likes to examine the situation. My assertion is that those who know Australian copyright law, know what changes are likely in the near future to that law (not to legal judgements) have chosen CC licensing for geographic data, so the assertion from ODBL camp that the CC licence is not suited to data is proven to be false in this instance. _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
