<HTML><HEAD></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>>> Does anyone from EPSG track this mailing list?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>You can contact Roger Lott, the chair of the Geodesy subcommittee of the
IOGP, which maintains the EPSG dataset, at <A
href="mailto:epsg.rl@btinternet.com">epsg.rl@btinternet.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Ask Roger about licensing terms.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Noel Zinn, Principal, Hydrometronics LLC</DIV>
<DIV>+1-832-539-1472 (office), +1-281-221-0051 (cell)</DIV>
<DIV>noel.zinn@hydrometronics.com (email)</DIV>
<DIV>http://www.hydrometronics.com (website)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>-----Original Message----- </DIV>
<DIV>From: Howard Butler </DIV>
<DIV>Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 10:49 AM </DIV>
<DIV>To: proj@lists.maptools.org </DIV>
<DIV>Subject: Re: [Proj] Use of SQLite </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>On 5/21/18 10:34 AM, Martin Desruisseaux wrote:</DIV>
<DIV>> Le 21/05/2018 à 17:12, Sebastiaan Couwenberg a écrit :</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>>> It forbids distribution of the EPSG Facilities for profit, not the
data.</DIV>
<DIV>>></DIV>
<DIV>> Note that §1 in EPSG terms of use said (emphasis is mine):
/"“EPSG</DIV>
<DIV>> Facilities” means the Registry, the EPSG Dataset (published through
the</DIV>
<DIV>> Registry *or through a downloadable MS-Access file or through a set
of</DIV>
<DIV>> SQL scripts* that enable a user to create an Oracle, MySQL,
PostgreSQL</DIV>
<DIV>> or other database and populate that database with the EPSG
Dataset)"/.</DIV>
<DIV>> So to me, forbids "for profit" distribution of EPSG data too since
they</DIV>
<DIV>> are created from the downloaded SQL scripts. But as said in my
previous</DIV>
<DIV>> email, this constraints is relaxed in §6iii (but it still not fall
in</DIV>
<DIV>> the category of open source license).</DIV>
<DIV>></DIV>
<DIV>Does anyone from EPSG track this mailing list? It would seem the
terms</DIV>
<DIV>of their license are causing the thing that they seek to limit -- the</DIV>
<DIV>changing and permutation of their database -- by people looking for</DIV>
<DIV>creative ways to comply while still in essence basing software on the</DIV>
<DIV>common definitions.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Sticky philosophical issues aside, from a practical standpoint, an</DIV>
<DIV>industry that wants late-binding out of the GDAL/PROJ/Friends stack
must</DIV>
<DIV>recognize that the dictionaries are a critical piece of
infrastructure</DIV>
<DIV>to make it all work. EPSG's licensing approach seems to me like good</DIV>
<DIV>intentions mixed with inexperience in open software licensing. It
would</DIV>
<DIV>be instructive to explicitly hear what EPSG was trying to prevent
with</DIV>
<DIV>its licensing approach rather than trying to legal wrangle their
license</DIV>
<DIV>without the context.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Howard</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>_______________________________________________</DIV>
<DIV>Proj mailing list</DIV>
<DIV>Proj@lists.maptools.org</DIV>
<DIV>http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/proj</DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>