On 14/03/2014, o...@k3v.eu <o...@k3v.eu> wrote: > On the flip side of this, if share alike is so great where are the > examples of organisations contributing back to OSM because of it?
There's one fairly obvious to me : the share-alike requirement is necessary to enforce the attribution requirement (otherwise any user could just change the license to one that doesn't require attribution). And that "(c) osm" visible in all the websites that use osm, be it fousquare or my cat's blog, is a very powerfull tool to gain recognition, users, and contributors. Without share-alike, companies would listen to their web designers and remove the "ugly and useless" attribution. > Mostly I think organisations contribute because it is in their interest > to do so (a better map makes their product better) not because the > license says they have to. The user's best interest is the carrot, but the license is the stick. There's no harm using both, it's actually better. I certainly hope that the carrot is the main reason why people contribute :) But the stick has been needed many times as well. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
