2009/12/12 Brendan Morley <morb....@beagle.com.au>: > If "the intent of OSM is to represent the centerline of a road as accurately > as possible" (and presumably other land features too) then this is another > reason to consider dropping the SA requirement - or dual licencing or dual > databases or being able to assign a licence per-object. > > Australian Government is now quite happy to share using CCBY, but CCBYSA > (and OdbL replicas) make it difficult for government to republish (e.g. it > shouldn't be seen to discriminate against constituents that don't wish to > accept the SA stipulation on contributed edits).
The problem I have with that is my labour is used to commercially benefit others and in turn nothing they do would have to be returned to the community. If people or companies are benefiting, why shouldn't there be some expectations to return the benefits to everyone, not just hoard it away for the benefit of commercial operators if they themselves are benefiting from it? > And who else but government is in the best position (and has the most self > interest) to determine exactly where the road was built? There is a lot of roads on paper that were never built so I don't see that as accurate either. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
