Hi, Sebastian Hohmann wrote: > I kind of miss the choise of "No, but I consider all my data PD". > Because even though any PD data could be also made ODbL, there is no > sense in declaring it PD if it's not collected and published as PD. > Unless there is a mechanisim in OSM to e.g. "Download only PD data" or a > seperate project that collects PD data (which is also put into > ODbL-OSM), I don't really see a sense in saying "My data is PD", since > it will not make any difference to "My data is ODbL". Or am I wrong?
The PD choice has little legal relevance. I campaigned for the inclusion of the PD choice because, as a basis for future licensing discussions and also questions of interpretation, I want to know where the community stands. SteveC & others tirelessly claim that there is a share-alike consensus in OSM and I don't believe that, and I want the issue put to rest one way or the other. If we find that 80% of OSMers actually are pro PD then this will not change the license one bit, but it might perhaps help reduce some share-alike zealotry and we might interpret some things in a more relaxed way (and ODbL leaves plenty of room for interpretation, concerning the big questions of what is substantial, what is a produced work, and what is a derived database). If, on the other hand, we find that 80% of OSMers would not release their data PD but prefer a share-alike license, then we would perhaps interpret the same questions with a more rigorous share-alike drift. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
