[OSM-talk] NearMap Community Licence and OSM Contributor Terms
cbro at semperpax.com
Thu Aug 19 11:23:24 BST 2010
> However, there are a couple of problems with the CTs.
> First: paragraph 2 of the CTs requires that an OSM user grants the OSMF a
> very wide ranging licence ("a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive,
> perpetual, irrevocable license to do any act that is restricted by copyright
> over anything within the Contents, whether in the original medium or any
> other. These rights explicitly include commercial use, and do not exclude
> any field of endeavour"). We can't grant a licence to derive data from our
> PhotoMaps that would allow the derived work to be submitted to OSM under
> that clause; it introduces yet another licence (above and beyond CC-BY-SA
> and ODbL/DbCL).
> Second: paragraph 3 of the CTs allows the licence to be changed to "another
> free or open licence", which isn't further defined. We can't grant a
> licence to derive data from our PhotoMaps that would allow the derived work
> to be submitted to OSM under that clause, since that other licence might not
> be CC-BY-SA or ODbL/DbCL.
> To summarise: under the terms of our Community licence (
> http://www.nearmap.com/products/community-licence) you can't use our
> PhotoMaps to derive data in a way that allows you to license that data under
> the current Contributor Terms. Data already derived from our PhotoMaps
> remains under CC-BY-SA, which again means that it can't be licensed under
> the CTs.
I've never been in this "License battle", and I only look at it kind of
"helicopter"-wise, but I honestly cannot see how an OSM contributor could
agree to leave such a broad freedom to OSMF to do anything they like with
I, as a OSM contributor, am looking to allow free and unrestricted access to
map data to everybody.
Those clauses would mean that, potentially, I wouldn't be mapping for
humanity but for the OSMF.
I've seen often that the reply to this argument is that we must trust OSMF,
that it will make sure OSM is under good care.
Honestly, in this world, who would trust a foundation whose members he
doesn't know personally? Even if he would, what about future members?
The fact that many key players (SteveC, Frederik, Richard(?)) in the project
also have commercial interests in the OSM data also make me nervous and
I've made up my mind and won't agree to the new license in the current form,
- Chris -
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk