> I'm also going to add we should do away with share alike in the mid term. > It's just complicated and hurting OSM. Case in point: example at hand.
+1. If you want to do anything with OSM data besides make map tiles, the cloud of uncertainty around what you can and can't do with the data is pretty terrifying. Instead of rallying around the community and getting excited about improving OSM, you instead spend time looking at alternatives and trying to find lawyers who are experts in software licensing who you can afford to talk to. The share-alike clause makes the barrier to using OSM data very high. -- Marc Regan On Wednesday, February 27, 2013 at 2:04 PM, Alex Barth wrote: > > On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Kate Chapman <k...@maploser.com > (mailto:k...@maploser.com)> wrote: > > My > > understanding is you are saying "I would like it to be this way," but > > at the moment it is not. Correct? > Actually to be more specific: I'm saying "I would like geocoding-like use > cases to be clarified, at the moment it is not clear. Here is what we should > do: specifically allow narrow extractions of OSM for geocoding-like use cases > to happen without the share-alike clause to kick in.". I'm also going to add > we should do away with share alike in the mid term. It's just complicated and > hurting OSM. Case in point: example at hand. > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org (mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org) > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > >
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
