Steve Coast <[email protected]> wrote: > > We've gone to insanely long lengths to make that the case, including getting > clarifications from Ordnance Survey, Nearmap and many others. As far as I'm > aware there are no remaining issues as to why you can't click 'accept'.
The solution to the problem of "We chose a licence and impose terms on contributors that's incompatible with most sources of data" isn't to go to each source of data individually to try to get them to relicence. That's as ridiculous as choosing a GPL-incompatible software licence and then whining that you can't legally incorporate all those wonderful GPL licenced projects into yours. > So while no doubt nearmap is a great resource and it's a shame they no longer > want to be involved, it's clear that the majority do - even large sclerotic > government institutions are being agile and helpful about this. I don't think you understand the depths of recalcitrance when it comes to the Australian government. Having data released under CC licences at all was a huge leap, there's effectively zero chance of OSM being able to licence the data under ODbL. The federal and state governments just don't care. -- Sam Couter | mailto:[email protected] OpenPGP fingerprint: A46B 9BB5 3148 7BEA 1F05 5BD5 8530 03AE DE89 C75C
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
