2009/12/14 Brendan Morley <morb....@beagle.com.au>: > And that requirement has a chilling effect (holds you back) on some > "productive ways". Hypothetical example: I want to put my fast food joints > on a map. If I licenced from a typical commercial provider, I pay a one time > consideration, produce my mashed up work, and be done with it. If I licenced > from OSM contributors under OdbL, I would have to make my "working notes" > for my fast food locations available to anyone who wanted them for > perpetuity. So I'd have to establish a role in my company to keep those > working notes safe. I think. I'd better hire a lwayer to be sure.
That's a bad example for 2 reasons, firstly why wouldn't you want your locations on OSM maps, it's free advertising! Secondly you would most likely want users to be able to click on a location to have an information pop up, this isn't extending the OSM data to include your locations, this is a JS layer (assuming in browser) and as such you aren't mixing data sets. > Extending/editing. That doesn't limit your use of the dataset, just your extension of it, as per the house example I gave, why not share that data back (you seem keen on people sharing data!) so everyone else can benefit from it as well. For example, say a mapping company uses OSM data as the base data set for country X, but they also buy aerial images to improve it, what are they loosing (other than competitive advantages) by not sharing that data back? You seem so in favour of one way sharing, but why do you want to restrict the flow of information back just because a company chooses to not share back for competitive reasons, after all they wouldn't be competitive in the first place without the base OSM data. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
