Hard to tag this because it’s basically just “licensing”, but I thought it was interesting.
It’s sort of the GPL-vs-BSD debate in the data licensing space. GPL/ODbL proponents think everyone’s out to steal their stuff and rob them of their hypothetical riches, BSD/non-ODbL proponents would rather make things unencumbered to increase adoption.
GPL/ODbL proponents think everyone’s out to steal their stuff and rob them of their hypothetical riches
No. GPL/ODbL proponents take an principled stand for open data/free software, while BSD/MIT/Apache is more pragmatic and compromising towards commercial entities who just want to use your work (which is fine, too!)
Both licenses have their merits, but have a different goal in mind.
There’s no “fear of theft” as far as GPL users are concerned. If you are afraid to have your stuff stolen or used without any kind of reward for the creator, you shouldn’t be using any free software or open source license, and certainly not the GPL.
Hard to tag.
I agree that “licensing” is part of “law”
I had this other article that I found – one of the cooler things I read this week. But couldn’t find a home for it on lobsters…
Would the philosophy tagtag be the one for this article? It was certainly an interesting article, but I am far more sceptical about the power of gun toting robots and drones than the author (but I would prefer good body armour in there presence :~))
Alright. I’ll post it with “philosopy” and see how that goes.
I guess I can see what camp you’re in :)
Anyway, this is a great thing for OSM. Maps are pretty uniquely used by businesses and other commercial organizations to show their data and otherwise modify it. Hopefully this increases OSM’s rate of adoption for those kinds of things. It’s got the look and API pretty much down by now.
I can’t speak to whether the licensing change is possible or not, but will say that I am concerned for OSM’s future in the current mapping climate if they don’t get more regular buy-in and use. If you look at the direction Apple and Google have been headed, there’s a huge focus on creating mobile platforms where 1) users are locked (or at least defaulted) into your mapping platform and 2) any interaction, improvements, or feedback are kept to yourself.
While these choices are perfectly normal and expected for private companies like Apple and Google, it leaves OSM in an awkward position. As long as they are viewed as a sub-par mapping option (whether this reflects reality or not), they will suffer from very little feedback and improvement. Meanwhile Apple and Google are regularly collecting data, improving their own maps, and doing all this with users that might otherwise be contributing to OSM.