[mkgmap-dev] Question on license for style-file

Thu Jan 21 01:31:19 GMT 2010

On 20.01.2010 08:01, Marko Mäkelä wrote:
> Hi Felix, all,
>
> On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 01:18:18AM +0100, Felix Hartmann wrote:
>    
>> I am going to publish my style-file (and dual license the rest like
>> typfiles), but I would like that
>> a) any works that build upon it, have to give attribution to openmtbmap.org
>> b) any maps generated by using the style-file or large parts of it have
>> to give attribution to openmtbmap.org
>>
>> Which license does fit here. Is GnuGPL v2 compatible with my intention
>> or is b) not possible?
>> Would CCBYSA 3.0 be better?
>>
>> Hope someone knows a bit better what I should choose. I don't really
>> understand how b) is treated by open-source licenses.
>>      
> I spent some thought on this last weekend.  I would choose GPLv2 by default,
> but I am not sure if it is compatible with the OpenStreetMap license
> <http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenStreetMap_License>.
> To my knowledge, the GPL is not compatible with any attribution clause,
> so it is not what you are looking for.
>    
That is what I figured out myself too. The intention of GPL is more to 
provide a copyleft framework to be forever able to freely use something. 
No need for attribution. Also I think maps produced using that 
style-file could then be published under any license (well if OSM data 
is used the license is anyhow more or less fixed, my problems are much 
more related to Garmin copying many of my ideas and innovations in their 
own maps )
> You might want to read about the DFSG
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debian_Free_Software_Guidelines>
> and especially on the GFDL resolution.
>
> It could be reasonable to release all TYP files under the same license
> as the OpenStreetMap data.  Currently, this would be the CCBYSA 2.0.
>    
The problem with CCBYSA is, if I'm correct that anyone subsequently 
using the style-file would only have to put the produced map/product 
under CCBYSA too and mention the original author (me)
but would not be obliged to opensource his style-file too. Mainly facing 
the same problem (or not depending on opionion) openstreetmap is facing 
currently too. (except that there is no unclear situation whether all 
contributors have to be attributed or not).
> I believe that the mkgmap built-in styles can be licensed by any license
> (currently the GPLv2).  This is OK because the styles are not copied to
> the output, but they are only rules for generating the output.
That is also my point of view here. Neither are the style-files copied 
to the output nor are they internal to mkgmap (they are called up 
dynamically). Otherwise it wouldn't be legal to distribute maps and 
keeping the style-file closed source.
>    But as
> soon as we start to distribute TYP files and other files that are literally
> copied to the output, it would be reasonable to use a different license
> or to grant a license exception, similar to what exists for the built-in
> run-time libraries of GCC (libgcc) and code generators such as compiler
> compilers (Flex, Bison, ANTLR, ...).
>    
As long as the maps are distributed in seperated parts with an 
installer/program to assemble them for use the TYP file can be put under 
any license (the maps work without the TYP file too, and also another 
TYP file could be used instead).
I think I will publish the style-file under CCBYSA 2.0 - even though I 
would prefer reuse to opensource their style-files too.

My main concern is that Garmin map publishers (like Onroute) use large 
parts of my style-file to have better autorouting and produce closed 
source commercial maps. They currently do many things wrong (even though 
Onroute is the only one that ever gave autorouting for cyclists some 
thought).
  I already had quite a few ideas/concepts copied by Garmin map 
compilers (e.g. using assymetric transparent lines - which was so 
forgotten by Garmin or not intended that they stopped supporting it 
until copying many parts for the Garmin Transalpin - if you look at 
their typfile it really shows many traces of the typfiles I used when 
starting my then called "mtb maps" on the osm wiki, or first versions of 
my "openmtbmap".). I also assume Garmin map producers will start using 
invisible routable lines (which I first used) or even several invisible 
routable lines to overcome the shortcoming of the garmin 
turn-time-penalties.

thanks for your comments,
Felix
> 	Marko
> _______________________________________________
> mkgmap-dev mailing list
> mkgmap-dev at lists.mkgmap.org.uk
> http://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev
>    