[Aust-NZ] OSM Licensing

[John Smith]

On 8 September 2010 20:47, Hamish <hamish_b at yahoo.com> wrote:
> the telephone number is not an abstraction of a telephone number, it /is/
> the data. the page layout is the copyrightable thing there.

This is how IceTV won their case against Channel 9, the tv listings of
program name + times are facts.

I think I read somewhere that IceTV gets or pays people to comment on
programs which then adds creative content to their database.

> in this way the OSM database has a lot more copyrightable work in it than
> say Google Map's satellite view (c) DigitalGlobe etc., who's only claim
> to artistic work is the placement of the satellite and the elevation
> correction algorithms.

This is usually licensed (contract) to Google and in turn Google
through their terms and conditions (another contract) allows you to
use the imagery on a limited basis.

> also, without a ShareAlike-style license, for my part I doubt I'd bother
> to contribute very much to OSM beyond perhaps fixing errors in my local
> neighborhood to make backyard BBQ invites less confusing for my friends;
> same as the corrections I've pushed upstream to Google Maps. I've little
> interest in becoming an unpaid employee of MegaMap Int'l, Ltd.

This is the comment I made the other day about PD (public domain) v SA
(share a like) being incompatible when used in the same project, in
the same way BSD and GPL being used on the same project would make
life difficult. This is a moral imperative, and most people will lean
one way or the other, and neither is a wrong choice, but you can't do
both at the same time.