On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Rob Myers <r...@robmyers.org> wrote:
> > For corporations its most of the time easier to spend 500K€ on a > > commercial dataset than to spend 5k€ on a Lawyer analyzing a > > licensing issue. > > If we add up the cost of all the time company representatives have > spent trying to get OSM to change its licensing *a second time*, it > would have been a lot cheaper for them to get together and just hire a > lawyer who knew what they were doing. 1. I wish this was true. 2. I wish you described the problem. There's a brake on adoption we put on OpenStreetMap by way of share alike for no tangible benefit. This is not just about shaping the OSM license to taste for certain 'company representatives' but about the overall growth potential of the project which is limited by its applications. All we have in favor of share alike is fear, and the fact that we've used it so far. We have no significant third party ODbL data releases due to OSM share alike to show for, but clear reasons and examples of people walking away from the project because of share alike. I've stated this argument before and I do understand that for many in the community share alike represents an important protection for the project. I don't follow this sentiment at all because of all the reasons Florian laid out in his response [1]. But I do understand the desire for a strong, lasting and independent OpenStreetMap. Maybe there's a way to think outside of the box of a license and come up with guarantees or principles the OpenStreetMap project would want to have to protect its interests. Thinking out loud. [1] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2014-October/008025.html
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
