>Some data is being released in Australia from governments under cc-by >licenses, and they would possibly benefit from OSM having a cc-by >compatible license, I'm sure some other donors would be in the same >boat.
If it is for the sake of compliance with licenses of data donors then there will always be cases that fit with one license type and don't fit with with other license types. It might also be that the majority of data donors prefer a more restricted license. If this is the main point it would be interesting to see any hard facts that a cc-by license would lead to more data donations. >In my mind, the main beneficiary would be companies selling products >or services and gaining a competitive advantage over their competition >by not being required to share any changes they make. Agreed. However, it would be very interesting to understand if a candidate is in favor of a PD-license because of his "business friendly attitude". I would myself consider as having a business friendly attitude but from a an OpenStreetMap perspective I would consider a less restrictive license a risky approach that requires very well balancing the trade-offs. In my discussions I often got the impression that many people just don't like to discuss the license and want to get rid of these discussions by simply favoring a less restricted license. And I think it should be transparent for which purpose a candidate for the board is in favor of a certain license type - and shouldn't be for the reason of laziness. Regards, Oliver -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Candidacy-AGM-Foundation-2010-Girona-tp5244442p5250938.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
