On May 3, 2008, at 2:39 PM, Ted Mielczarek wrote: > For me, it seems ironic that a project spawned from licensing issues > over map data has found itself in a situation where licensing issues > are still a problem, and hopefully the license update will resolve > these and make using OSM data easier. Why else are we contributing > this data if not for people to *use* it?
This mirrors my feelings exactly. When I found out about this project, I was really excited. I am writing a geotagging program that could greatly benefit from a worldwide feature set, and it seemed like OSM would be a great match. Now I'm not too sure. I live in the US, and have seen the benefits of (and perhaps come to take for granted) a significant body of Public Domain, free-as-in-WTFPL geographic datasets. Obviously on the other side of the Atlantic, you have seen the opposite: an overbearing monopoly that wants to keep this data under lock and key. Now what has been done to remedy that situation? I read things like "but aha! that pub's location might be a derivative work of a ShareAlike street!" and it sounds an awful lot how the OS claims copyright in everything from the Soviet topo maps to random tourist brochures. Except instead of insisting on big fees for use, it seems some parts of the community instead insist on big "freedoms" resulting from use. How is that better? I'm worried that if my users geotag their photos against OSM data, someone will come out of the woodwork insisting that the photos "could be considered a derivative of their work", and I can either hire a lawyer versed in International IP law [implying that they wouldn't mind me ignoring what they really want done with their data, provided it looked like I could get away with it]. Or I could just play it safe and pass the virus to my (fleeing) users. It doesn't hurt the US Census Bureau when someone takes their public domain TIGER data and turns it into a proprietary product, or one with an arguably more restrictive (or "more libre") licence. However, think of how much less useful the TIGER data would have been to both these "evil corporations" AND the open source community if data sets like that had to be used under a particular license instead of public domain (with attribution often requested). I understand that some feel the cause would be hurt if their data could ALSO be used in proprietary datasets. Obviously I have a different opinion on this matter, as do several others. What bothers me is that those in favor of viral licenses are able to even trump those who would rather have their data in the public domain -- and this by the same sort of "derivative work" FUD that makes a free set of map data so important in the first place. thanks, -natevw _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk
