Let's start that after some thorough reading of this list and being an OSMF member I have voted in favor of the ODBL
license. Not that I am in favor of this License, but because it is less bad then the CC-by-SA license. I am in favor of no license at all. Public data should be public to anyone, without any restriction. I do not see any drawbacks for OSM in that model. I still have to see the advantage of having a license at all. Until now it has been a very disturbing factor in OSM, as *substantial* efforts have gone into this discussion, there is a large risk of losing substantial parts of captured data, and we are risking several fork projects. All positive energy that would should have improved our maps instead. I understand that we cannot change CCbySA into the free domain anymore, and trying to do so that would probably create similar effects as the current situation. But we started using *a* License, and that was wrong from the beginning. Especially there is nothing to be won by having and maintaining a License. We just (partially) joined this world of lawyers, justice and businesses models based on legal actions we all (?) disgust . Gert Gremmen ----------------------------------------------------- Openstreetmap.nl (alias: cetest) P Before printing, think about the environment. Van: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Namens Anthony Verzonden: Sunday, December 06, 2009 4:36 AM Aan: Richard Fairhurst CC: [email protected] Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] my views on the ODbL On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 7:24 PM, Richard Fairhurst <[email protected]> wrote: I don't think you have at all answered the points in that, and therefore I stand by the viewpoint that in Australia, ODbL has the best chance of any open, non-clickwrap licence of protecting OSM's data. Which is to say, none at all? You compare the ODbL to licenses offered by Tele Atlas, and Navteq, and Google, but there's a key difference with these licenses. They don't allow redistribution, or only allow limited redistribution. The main way they protect against people taking their databases is by not letting anyone download their complete raw database (or letting only a select few highly trustworthy organizations have access to the complete raw database). What's to stop someone from setting up a mirror of the OSM database and not putting a TOS on their website? I believe the answer is that not only is there nothing to stop them, but people are encouraged to do so. Now, when I download the OSM database from that mirror site, what binds me to the ODbL? Absolutely nothing.
<<image001.gif>>
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
