Yes, that was what I was going to do. However, I realised that the license for OSM will change soon. So, if I start using the CC-BY-SA license for coordinates on my web site, I would have to change soon to the new OSM license (ODBL).
Which raises an interesting question: if my web site had 10000 CC-BY-SA licensed coordinates derived from OSM, how could I change that license to the new ODBL license? I would have to send an email to all OSM contributors and ask for the permission? I bet I couldn't get a 100% approval. Fortunately, I don't have such a data set, so I don't have to worry about this. However, that raises another worrying question: Once the new ODBL license is effective, how do I know that the license won't change again (see http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2008-September/001158.html: "I assure everyone the license will need to be changed again at some point in the future.") How will I be able to handle the next license change? Of course, old coordinates could remain licensed under CC-BY-SA, the new coordinates licensed under ODBL and the future coordinates under ODBL2. Then, I want to create a derivative work out of these (say, count the number of places within London). Which license to use for the result?? This makes the usage of OSM questionable, so I have decided not to use the OSM map on my site, at least for the time being. BR, Kari On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 11:26 AM, Rob Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Depending on how it relates to the OSM data, you might be able to BY > your data, and then this could be combined with OSM's data to produce > a BY-SA derivative. > > See here for compatibility: > http://creativecommons.org.tw/licwiz/english.html > > - Rob. > > On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 7:52 AM, Kari Pihkala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> I'm creating a web site where people can set locations for places over a > >> osm > >> map. I also allow public to download these coordinate sets freely. > >> I think according to your share-alike license the derived coordinates > must > > > >> be under the same license (by-sa 2.0)? I'm ok about this. > >> > >> However, people are also inserting additional information about these > gps > >> coordinates, such as place names, address, etc. > >> As the data set is a combination of gps coordinates (derived from osm > map) > > > >> and names, addresses etc. does it mean that the whole data set must be > >> licensed under by-sa-2.0?? > >> > >> BR, > >> Kari > > > > I'm anwering myself, as I found the answer in FAQ. (should have read it > > first!!) > > > > > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Common_licence_interpretations > > > > > > "I created a layer on top of an OSM map. What do I have to put under your > > license? > > ... If what you create is based on OSM data (for example if you create a > new > > layer by looking at the OSM data and refering to locations on it) then it > is > > likely you have created a derivative work. > > > > ... If you have created a derivative work, the work as a whole must be > > subject to the OSM licence. .." > > > > I was thinking about licensing my own data under CC-BY, but your FAQ says > > that I have to license it under CC-BY-SA. > > > > > > I see two options for me: > > 1. Dual license the data (all data with coordinates under CC-BY-SA, my > data > > without the coordinates under CC-BY) > > 2. Single license the data under CC-BY without any coordinates. No one > will > > have access to the coordinates. > > > > > > BR, > > Kari > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > legal-talk mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
