<div dir="ltr"><div>Some questions, Christoph:</div><div>Why would a mapper need to keep a separate record of their contributions, if the changeset metadata already keeps a record of which contributor made which edit?</div><div>In any event, why would there be any "damage for the OSMF" in any circumstance, in the hypothetical case of a contributor who did not intend PD or did not have authority to contributo PD vs a data user?</div><div>Are you a lawyer or judge?<br> </div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 1:48 AM Christoph Hormann <<a href="mailto:chris_hormann@gmx.de">chris_hormann@gmx.de</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
I was originally going to stay out of this topic but since even after<br>
Paul linked to the clarifying statement about the PD checkbox people<br>
(including a LWG member) float the idea that this has practical meaning<br>
for data users at the moment i feel the need to rectify that. So a few<br>
points:<br>
<br>
* The OSMF (AFAIK) currently does not distribute OSM data under licenses<br>
other than the ODbL. So the idea that any data user could in an area<br>
with exclusively contributions from mappers with the PD checkbox<br>
checked use the data without following the ODbL is wishful thinking on<br>
side of data users. In a court case this would be a preposterous<br>
approach IMO. They would be asked where they got the data from and<br>
that would obviously be the OSMF (directly or indirectly) and that<br>
would be the end of the argument.<br>
<br>
* As i see it the statement made by contributors registering with the PD<br>
checkbox is neither a modification of the contributor terms nor a<br>
statement towards anyone other than the OSMF. In particular it is not<br>
a statement of assurance that the mapper in question does not make any<br>
use of data sources that are not PD as long as they are compatible with<br>
the ODbL and permitted to be used for OSM under the current conditions<br>
(which is what the mapper ensures under the CTs section 1a).<br>
<br>
* Even the statement that only lower damages could be claimed in a court<br>
case in case it involves data contributed by mappers with the PD<br>
checkbox checked seems doubtful. If i work as a mapper for a<br>
proprietary data company and sign a statement that i regard my<br>
contributions to them to be under PD that does not in any way affect<br>
the value of the data they might distribute to customers or the damages<br>
they might claim in case of illegal use. So unless a mapper has kept a<br>
separate record of their contributions before uploading to the OSMF<br>
servers and licensed that to the data user or when we are talking about<br>
a PD data import i see no basis for the claim for there to be less<br>
damage for the OSMF in a court case about use in violation of the ODbL.<br>
<br>
Long story short: The PD checkbox is nothing more than a survey of all<br>
newly registered contributors on how they view their future<br>
contributions at the time they register. That is a valuable thing to<br>
do (and it might be woth maybe even thinking about a few other survey<br>
questions to ask). But it is nothing more.<br>
<br>
Note also that any claims for the possibility of using OSM data outside<br>
the limitations of the ODbL (or any future different license adopted<br>
using the process defined in the CTs) are also quite dangerous for any<br>
negotiations with data providers (like aerial imagery etc.) about<br>
permissions to use their data as a source for OSM. If a data provider<br>
might need to fear that permission for using their data in OSM might<br>
lead to a mapper with the PD checkbox checked to use that data and then<br>
a data user using the resulting data from within OSM under the<br>
assumption that it is PD that endangers our chances to be able to use<br>
such data sources.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Christoph Hormann<br>
<a href="http://www.imagico.de/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.imagico.de/</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
osmf-talk mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">osmf-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk</a><br>
</blockquote></div>