On 26 April 2011 22:06, Elizabeth Dodd <ed...@billiau.net> wrote: > Bluntly, > CC-by-SA for geodata is fine here. It's good enough for our government, > it's good enough for us. (Au government now is using CC-by for data). > We believe in Share-Alike. Actually, we have been brought up to believe > in share alike and helping each other, and that might be part of the > reason you reach a brick wall on the change to a complex legal licence. >
Wait, why did the Australian government stop using CC-by-SA and move to CC-by? I actually wasn't aware of this, maybe because CC-by-SA adds needless restrictions and ambiguity on using the data? The AU government also provides the data under other specific terms on request. Mike of LWG has made a formal request. Notes in today's LWG meeting minutes. I believe in Share-Alike too, I have invested 1000s of hours mapping South Africa.* Thankfully ODbL is a Attribution and Share-Alike license, with usage ambiguity removed. *sarcasm* But it all doesn't matter anyway, John Smith has degreed that all Australian geodata is PD anyway. See: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2011-April/007829.html *: I am proud to be number 2 in the contribution index for South Africa: http://stat.latlon.org/za/latest/users.html Regards Grant _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
