On 22 September 2010 17:30, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > Convincing someone to give you date is a bit like sales. We're not lying to > people but we're not trying to scare them either. We're not saying things
Actually, it's a lie of omission: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie#Lying_by_omission > Of course if it would be my *intent* to let such a discussion fail because There is a difference between scaring them away and giving them all the pertinent facts that may become relevant. In this case they may assume that they will always be given indirect attribution when in fact this may not be the case in future. > Most people we've spoken to are happy if we can put out a press release that > says "XYZ council helps OpenStreetMap" and if we have a Wiki page that > confirms it. The would get that even with PD. Based on what you have said, I don't hold much faith in this statement, they may assume that tiles generated from OSM data would attribute OSM and in turn link back to their formal attribution by OSM, others have pointed out other situations where this may also fail. > Of course YMMV and there will always be hard cases who demand a depth of > attribution that even (our fashion of) CC-BY-SA cannot give them. I'm not talking about this situation, as you said, even the current license doesn't cover this situation. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
