[OSM-legal-talk] Updates to ODbL related Wiki pages and outstanding issues
peter.miller at itoworld.com
Fri Feb 27 22:55:13 GMT 2009
I have been through the wiki pages that relate to the ODbL and updated
them where I can.
I have updated the name of the license to OdBL on all pages (I think).
I have updated the links to the license itself to point to
OpenDataCommons not OpenContentLawyer in all cases (I think).
I have also done some more work on the Use Cases page to make the
discussion points clearer. I have moved the legal council comments to
be directly below the Use Case is all cases and in some cases have
responded to questions. I have also moved the Wikimapia Use Case to
the negative Use Case list from the positive list. There is another
Use Case in the negative list relating to WIkipedia which I think
belongs in the Positive Use Case list but am waiting for any comments
on that one before moving it.
Here are the list of pages I believe are be relevant to the ODbL
license going forward.
Work that still needs to be done...
I don't have the knowledge to update the Time Line page (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Timeline
). I encourage someone within the licensing team to update this page
and reconcile it with the new 'Implementation Plan' page (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Implementation_Plan
). In what way are these pages serving different purposes? Should one
be deleted and should any relevant content be transferred to the other?
A new blank 'Implementation Issues' page as been created (and is
referred to from the email announcement. Does this supersede the 'Open
Issues' page and should the content be moved to is from that page or
is it seen as being for something different? Could someone from the
license team clarify.
There are a number of important issues on the 'Open Issues' page (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Open_Issues
). I suggest we build on this list in the coming days as required. I
have added an open question about 'who's feature is it' for license
transfer purposes. Are we to get any comment from the legal council or
the licensing team on any of these?
More information about the legal-talk