[Geowanking] iPhone Geolocating technology?

[Allan Doyle]

Does anyone have a handle on the copyrightability of this kind of  
data in general? Isn't wifi data factual data that is not  
copyrightable in the US?

	Allan

On Sep 12, 2007, at 18:23 , Sergio Cardoso wrote:

> And just remember that the other option (besides Intel's ParcPlace)  
> is SkyHook and Loki which got enough cash and smarts to influence  
> smart heads.
>
> // asc
>
> Drew from Zhrodague wrote:
>
>>> I'd be happy to help with that one; seems pretty straightforward.
>>>
>>> Personally I don't really care re GPL/CC or not; people are going to
>>> do whatever they want anyway and power is only as strong as
>>> enforcement.  All you do is force people out of the sunlight when  
>>> you
>>> try to constrain their use.
>>
>>
>>     Correct.
>>
>>
>>
>>> I'm just a guy. However if cddb, and before that a certain  
>>> mailing list, tell me anything, it's that someone else asserting  
>>> compilation copyright on data I provided in a way that precludes  
>>> me from using it, is unpalatable. As long as there's a license  
>>> that precludes someone from taking the provided data private and  
>>> making a profit, good.
>>>
>>> I'm not opposed to profit, but if you want my data, pay me or  
>>> keep giving me stuff for free, (if) I gave you stuff for free.
>>
>>
>>     Agreed, and that's been one of the points I wanted to make --  
>> to get people to visit, and interest them enough to go out and  
>> wardrive (contests, etc).
>>
>>
>>     I know if I just published this stuff as public domain,  
>> certain unnamed groups would copy it, and call the database their  
>> own. This wouldn't be the first time, and that's why I want to put  
>> some protections (for the project) into the license. I'd like to  
>> make sure that we're cited -- at the minimum -- as a data source,  
>> and probably free for noncommercial use. There is a commercial-use/ 
>> subscription option in here somewhere. This is why the CC licenses  
>> appeal to me.
>>
>>
>>> I do tend to support BSD licensing because I don't begrudge others
>>> making money off of my work, and the quality of participants where
>>> participants can freely monetize work is higher.  If you think of
>>> source code (or datasets) as a liability that must be maintained,
>>> rather than an asset, then you will want the most liberal license
>>> possible to push those liabilities away from oneself.  If you  
>>> want to
>>> treat the work as an asset, then don't make it free at all.
>>
>>
>>     Hm, I don't see our dataset as a liability. It is definately  
>> an asset. It does not, however, have any value sitting on a disk  
>> array at my house -- it has far more value in being plotted,  
>> analyzed, spindled, etc by third parties. Mashups, research,  
>> curious folks.
>>
>>     This is why I pipe up, and ask the experts. This is a bit out  
>> of my expertise. Am I making any sense?
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geowanking mailing list
> Geowanking at lists.burri.to
> http://lists.burri.to/mailman/listinfo/geowanking

-- 
Allan Doyle
+1.781.433.2695
adoyle at eogeo.org