How long, one wonders, until Open Street Map becomes the ubiquitous standard? Could Google switch to using it, and feed into it themselves to improve its results further?
I don't fully understand the ramifications, but it's possible that this was done so that companies like Google could build products on top of OSM data rather than re-invent the wheel, possibly in a parallel to GPL and LGPL or the split between Linux and thing like Tivo or Android built on top.
From their relicencing FAQ:
" If you distribute OSM data with other map data, you have to make the other data available; But if you create an "integrated experience" (e.g. mashup or cartography), the share-alike licence only applies to the map data. "
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Database_License_Rel...
Good luck with that.
That's potentially a huge improvement.
The problem there is there's a huge grey area as to what will be considered a Derivative Database vs. OSM data in a Collective Databases with other, proprietary databases.
E.g. if the data in the properitary database contains road data that augments the OSM data, will the result of combining it with OSM data in a collection create a Collective Database or a Derivative Database? How well must the separate layers stand on their own before combining them with OSM data is "derivative".
They're trying to walk a very fine line, and I suspect quite a few lawyers will make a decent amount of money interpreting that license for clients that wants to use OSM data but are worried about where the line goes.
On one hand sharing modifications to base layers would not be an issue, but the business model revolves around allowing clients to upload their own layers, many of which they can't release for business reasons or in some cases legal reasons.
The old license meant a lot of effort was wasted on producing own base maps which could've gone into fixing issues with OSM instead (e.g. areas covered by customers include sparsely populated areas where both OSM and Google's maps are severely lacking, but where getting GPS traces of all the local roads that they could release would be easy).
The new license seems to be sufficient for their usage. The problem currently is just that it's vague. E.g. I think it's safe to assume that your example would be ok, but there's still a lot of grey areas. For the company mentioned above, I also think the new license is probably ok, but it'll take some time to review.
While on one hand the new license gives more opportunities for keeping data private in some instances, I think it'll actually result in more data released for the reason that it allows a lot of people that previously would never dare touch OSM data to actually use it, and so gives them a reason to contribute fixes and improvements.
IMHO, basic venue metadata info like name, address, geocoded address, and other details like phone number, hours and website should count as map data. Stuff like user reviews should count as mashup data.
However the advantage of OSM is that it's the data, and you can render your own maps on your own hardware, and depending on your budget, make it as fast as possible.
In a recent trip to Bristol I was staying at a guest house on Exchange Avenue:
Google: https://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en...
OSM: http://www.openstreetmap.org/?lat=51.454096&lon=-2.59397...
The truth lies somewhere between the various maps out there. In some places Google rules, in others OSM rules. Occasionally, neither rules and usually some local mapping does.
I like that there's competition to keep all of them on their toes, and I very much like that one of the contenders is a community project.
I suspect this is a case that is particularly well suited for crowd-sourcing though, since these are the sort of places people who enjoy mapping are likely to enjoy exploring the most.
Why would nokia be adding an openstreetmap overlay instead of a nokia maps one?
> are they waiting for webgl to be on mobile?
Are who waiting? You may not know that nokia not only sells cartography data to gps makers and online map services but also build and sells smartphones... Their current mobile maps, drive and city lens applications are really impressive.
> who are waiting?
This is what I was asking. Their webgl seems to be a big leap over google maps and I haven't seen it beyond the webgl demo. I wasn't sure if they were using this technology beyond this demonstration.
They could complement their maps with OSM's data where it is better, and there are cases when it is. How such data would be licensed and what OSM should ask in return is an interesting question.
http://oegeo.wordpress.com/2012/09/06/google-maps-and-openst...
Down the road, I don't want Google to be the only one with enough mapping knowledge to have self-driving car tech. That doesn't seem like data that should be owned by a corporation.
Switching to open data would hopefully reduce both factors.
I combine all of that data to try and come up with interesting routes to cycle - OpenStreetMap is great for detailed cycle path data, Streetview allows me to judge whether I want to cycle along a road (I prefer offroad) and Geograph is the closest you can get to an offroad Street View. And if I am going anywhere serious (well out of town) then I replace OpenStreetMap with OS maps from Bing.
It mostly covers the US and there are a lot of legal issues surrounding the different layers meaning it is difficult to run it as anything but a free site which may be why more people don't do this.
"Google's mission is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful."
http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/lc88a/were_the_google_...