4 ms·

> In practice there are people who won't be able to use the data for their use case if a non-permissive license is applied Well, of course. The whole point of

> In practice there are people who won't be able to use the data for their use case if a non-permissive license is applied Well, of course. The whole point of a non-permissive license is to.... not permit things. It's frustrating to see people bring this out like some sort of gotcha. I use the AGPL because I think it's important that users have access to the source code the applications they interact with operate on. If people aren't okay with that, then they're completely welcome to not use my code. (I am somewhat sympathetic to people who think that the GPL's definition of "Combined Work" is too broad—I've personally never viewed the inclusion of dependencies in a dynamic programming language with strong module boundaries like Node, Ruby or Python as creating a "Combined Work"—and I'd happily license my works with a theoretical LAGPL or an Affero-like Mozilla Public License if either of those were available. Unfortunately, the AGPL remains the only game in town for networked software.)

pcthrowaway 5y ago
I'm not sure if you're aware, but the data on OSM is covered by their ODbL which is a "share-alike" license. From their FAQ[1]: What do you mean by Share-Alike? If you publicly use any adapted version of our database, or a partial extraction from it, or works (such as maps) produced from an adapted database, you must also offer that adapted database under the ODbL. In other words, if you improve our data and then distribute it, you need to share your improvements with the general public at no charge. A painless way to do that is to contribute your improvements directly back to OpenStreetMap. Share-Alike only applies if you distribute what you have done to outside people or organisations. You can do what you like at home, or in your school, organisation or company ... the following section does not apply to you. It's true that people can use their software and data for non-free services built on non-FOSS code, but people using the data publicly do have to distribute modifications to the data-set under the same license [1]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License
- nightpool 5y ago
  Yes, I'm well aware. I think it maybe makes more sense to make this reply to one of the other comments I'm replying to.

pcthrowaway 5y ago

I'm not sure if you're aware, but the data on OSM is covered by their ODbL which is a "share-alike" license. From their FAQ[1]: What do you mean by Share-Alike? If you publicly use any adapted version of our database, or a partial extraction from it, or works (such as maps) produced from an adapted database, you must also offer that adapted database under the ODbL. In other words, if you improve our data and then distribute it, you need to share your improvements with the general public at no charge. A painless way to do that is to contribute your improvements directly back to OpenStreetMap. Share-Alike only applies if you distribute what you have done to outside people or organisations. You can do what you like at home, or in your school, organisation or company ... the following section does not apply to you. It's true that people can use their software and data for non-free services built on non-FOSS code, but people using the data publicly do have to distribute modifications to the data-set under the same license [1]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License

nightpool 5y ago
Yes, I'm well aware. I think it maybe makes more sense to make this reply to one of the other comments I'm replying to.