[geo-discuss] PGL and geodata licensing (was Re: [OSGeo-Board] Bylaws posted )

[Richard Fairhurst]

Hi all,

Jo wrote:

> There have been several bursts of licensing conversation on the
> openstreetmap list over the last year. Each time it never really
> reached a resolution; the main sticking point seems to be commercial /
> noncommercial use of open geodata. Some people are just not happy to
> allow commercial reuse of their work without restriction, and want a
> license which precludes that. Steve Coast more or less declared
> CC-BY-SA by fiat, and no-one contributing seems unhappy with that now.

(tentatively sticks hand up)

I'm not a fan of ShareAlike licences at all, for two reasons. Firstly, 
I think they "ghettoise" software/data for use solely by a small, 
fairly homogenous community, rather than opening them up to the many 
and varied uses that organisations of all types might want to put them 
to. Secondly, the economics tend to reward the technician (the whole 
Linux model of "selling associated services and expertise") rather than 
the artist.

But I realise it's a minority view, and I'm contributing to OSM because 
it's a great project which will enrich the world, even if I don't agree 
with the licensing. geowiki.com v2 may seek to offer a much smaller, 
but public domain dataset as a supplementary.

What I would suggest, though, is that any geodata licence needs to be 
100% clear on what it means by a "derivative work". Does that include 
(a) an enlarged geodata set? (clearly, yes). (b) a map made from the 
geodata? (c) a website or book using such a map?

cheers
Richard