2009/12/8 Paul Houle <p...@ontology2.com>: > My major concern with a license change is compatibility with > CC-BY-SA sources such as dbpedia, wikipedia, etc. > > So far as I'm concerned, dbpedia and freebase are the core of a > linked data space that assigns taxonomic identifiers to (most) "things" > that exist, and will really be critical to machine understanding > efforts going forward. I think we're going to see additional data > 'stuck' to a growing katamari ball of facts and relationships. I think > that that ball of data is going to form a 'giant component' that grows > explosively, and anything that isn't legally compatible with that space > is effectively going to 'disappear;' one of the reasons why Cyc really > failed to make a splash is that organizations needed to make a huge > investment just to get a good look at it. > > In the short term I'm primarily concerned w/ displaying slippy maps > to display CC-BY-SA and PD-derived coordinates and shapes on. That's > one issue. Another, longer-term, issue would be the construction of > new products based on automated reasoning applied to ways in OSM. > > Note that freebase seems to be safe to merge with OSM data, but I'm > not sure if using OSM data prevents me from pushing > corrections/enhancements that are found in my processing chain back into > Freebase.
This is my personal opinion, based on probably wrong information, but since no one else answered this might inspire someone to come up with a better answer :) Wikipedia is US based, and in the US a collection of facts can't be copyrighted and neither can a location, so even though wikipedia is cc-by-sa the factual information + location data isn't copyrightable so cc-by-sa doesn't apply. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
