On Thu, Mar 05, 2009 at 09:42:54AM -0000, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote: > One thing we should not loose sight of in this process is what OSM is > collecting, and thus the limit of what we might wish to see contributed > back. The locations of butterflies and endangered species are examples of > transient data and some might argue it's not therefore something we would > want in OSM anyway. Limiting the applicability of the licence to relevant > data is not something I've personally thought about before, but it might > need considering if it has not been thus far.
That assumes that derivative data always goes back to OSM. If OSM doesn’t want the locations of butterflies, then it doesn’t have to incorporate it. Someone else may want to use the locations of butterflies. If they’re licensed under a free licence, this should be possible. Distributing free data doesn’t mean always contributing directly back to the original project (that’s quite restrictive IMO, and fails the desert island test[1] (a test for free software, but the same principle applies)), it means making it available for others to use. [1]: http://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html#desert_island -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
