> It would appear that any and all data associated with a website or mobile app
> becomes fair game once OSM data is used.
That may be "an" appearance, but it is not true.
Actually, you should be fine, this is a very common use case.
There are some details, but when making tiles, as long as they are only
rendered together, not put together in a single "database", there's no
share-alike.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/License/Use_Cases#Case_3:_I_want_to_publish_something_based_on_OSM_and_my_own_data
I agree this isn't clear. Confusion is certainly an issue with ODbL.
Alex's issue with geocoding is different. I agree, we need to take a serious
look at this, and have it clarified.
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>________________________________
> From: Rob <smartt...@gmail.com>
>To: Licensing and other legal discussions. <legal-talk@openstreetmap.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2013 4:19 PM
>Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License question, user clicking on map
>
>
>+1 +1 +1
>
>
>Would love to use OSM data to create a tile server for a project I have in the
>works but the share-alike clause has stopped me from moving forward with OSM.
>
>
>Rather than share-alike I would like to share-what-I-like but that is not an
>option.
>
>
>Currently there seems to be no limit to what OSM could claim rights to under
>the share-alike clause.
>
>
>It would appear that any and all data associated with a website or mobile app
>becomes fair game once OSM data is used.
>
>
>Rob
>
>
>Sent from my iPhone
>
>On Feb 27, 2013, at 3:24 PM, Marc Regan <marcre...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>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> 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
>>>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>>
>>
>_______________________________________________
>>legal-talk mailing list
>>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
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
