Historically using CC by-SA for the tiles had a certain logic, as the data used that licence and while there was a cloud of uncertainty how that would apply to OSM data, you could reasonably argue that the tiles were a derivative and had to be licensed on the same terms.
Post licence change that tight linkage has gone and the creator of a "Produced Work" has a large degree of freedom in how to license their work. It would, for example, be completely possible to take the CC0 licensed openstreetmap-carto style sheet and produce -exactly- the same tiles as the standard layer and license them differently. Or are we claiming that we are actually licensing the design/look and feel of the standard tiles on CC by-SA terms (and by that have rights in any derivatives of that style) and you can't actually use openstreetmap-carto style sheet to produce a style that is visually similar to our standard style? Unlikely, so why are we are applying a licence that has a number of undesirable properties and would cause a lot of headaches if taken seriously to our tiles? Simon Am 05.11.2016 um 21:03 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > > 2016-11-05 15:26 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>>: > > As I mentioned at SOTM there is no real rationale these days > for the CC by-SA licence and we should probably be looking at that too > > > > Would you mind elaborating briefly on this here as well? Not everybody > had the possibility to attend SotM... > > cheers, > Martin >
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
