I think this is actually much more positive than you think: https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/CDLA_permissive_compatibility
CDLA Permissive 2 seems very open, and OSM seems to agree. ../Dave On Dec 15, 2022 at 2:59 PM -0500, Stewart Russell via talk <[email protected]>, wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 12:28 PM Evan Leibovitch via talk <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > From the FAQ: > > > > > > > Data contributed to ODbL licensed datasets will be contributed under > > > > both the ODbL and CDLA permissive v2. Contributions to CDLA permissive > > > > v2 datasets will be contributed under the CDLA permissive v2. > > > > > > I don't know these licenses. Are they open enough such this project's > > > data can be used by OSM? > > ODbL is the licence used by OSM. Its background is more from European > database copyright than open source. It's a share-alike licence with required > attribution. CDLA I'd never heard of, but it seems like a "let's make the MIT > license, but for data". Many VC-funded startups balk at the share-alike and > attribution requirements of OSM, because they just want the free data and > earn money from contributors' work. > > This looks like Overture can consume OSM data, but OSM can't use Overture's > data easily. What a surprise. > > Stewart > --- > Post to this mailing list [email protected] > Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
--- Post to this mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
