On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:13, Nathan Edgars II <nerou...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > To me, the primary benefit of a free license is that the project has a > 'life > of its own' beyond the host: if the host decides to stop hosting it, or > letting people edit, someone else can continue it as it had been. I don't > care about the viral effects of such a license except insofar as they > ensure > that the project can't be 'locked-up' if enough people want it to continue. > I think this is an argument for Public Domain. As far as I understand the licenses, nobody is permitted to fork the OSM data without permissions, and it is thus not truly "open": - with CC-BY-SA, you'd have to ask every contributor the permission to fork their data (or is only attribution needed? To whom then? The individual contributors?) - with ODbL, you'd have to ask OSMF, which will be the "owner" of the data. Please correct me if I'm wrong. - Chris -
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk