Frederik Ramm schrieb: > Hi, > > Lutz Horn wrote: >>> ODbL tries to reduce this problem by exempting "produced works" from the >>> share-alike effect, and this is a good thing, but still there will be >>> many use cases adversely affected by the remaining share-alike for data. >> Could you please explain why you consider this influence a problem? > > This influence is a problem because it drastically increases the price > exacted from the user. It's like saying "anything compiled with gcc > should be GPL licensed". It is of course anyone's right to demand that, > but it is in my view an excessive demand that will marginalise the tool > in question; and I consider OSM a tool.
I had the gcc comparison also in mind, but it is simply the wrong picture here. Mapnik or osmarender would be in our case the gcc. I'm thinking of OSM data as the geodata "source code". > The point I was making is that while modifying GPL licensed software or > re-mixing CC-BY-SA licensed creative works is very much a specialist > activity that only a fraction of users will pursue, in the domain of > geodata analysing and remixing/recombining the data is a standard activity. At least till today I would call geodata analysers also specialists ;-) > This leads me to conclude that geodata share-alike cannot be compared > with, say, GPL. Geodata share-alike has a much greater impact. No, its basically the same. It empowers people to do things that they couldn't have done before - without spending an insane amount of money :-) Regards, ULFL _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
