On 08/19/2010 01:17 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 7:58 AM, Chris Browet<[email protected]> wrote:
They definitely need to define that, it would help. "an OSI endorsed free
and open license", maybe...
OSI don't endorse Open Data Licenses as far as I know. Open Data
Commons do and they even consulted with the OSM community in writing
ODbL.
OSI are looking to use Open Knowledge Foundation's Free Knowledge
Definition -
http://blog.okfn.org/2010/08/04/update-on-open-source-initiatives-adoption-of-the-open-knowledge-definition/
I certainly wouldn't use OSI approval as any kind of gold standard, though.
- Rob.
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
