[OSM-legal-talk] INANAL - But these guys are

Nick Black nickblack1 at gmail.com
Mon Feb 26 14:44:29 GMT 2007


We can ask them about how the CC license applies to OSM and what they
consider constitutes a derived work and the like.  But we can also ask
them about other licensing options for OSM - perhaps with a view to
creating a CC, or other such, license for geodata.  This is a bit
vague I know.  Basically we need to get all the pressing issues
surrounding OSM's license put into one document, rather than being
distributed accross the wiki/mailing list/peoples heads.  I'll let you
know more details as I hear them.

Nick

On 2/26/07, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net> wrote:
> Nick Black wrote:
>
> > So with a bit of arm bending, we've managed to get some CC guys to
> > take a look at OSM's license situation.  What we need is a one or two
> > page document that summarises OSM's current license, points out the
> > problems with it and summarises some questions that we have about
> > licensing.
>
> Can you elucidate a bit as to the type of question they can answer?
>
> I'm guessing that it's useful to ask CC lawyers questions about
> interpretation/meaning of a CC licence. I guess it's not useful to ask
> them big-picture questions like "should we just go PD instead?".
>
> cheers
> Richard
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-talk
>


-- 
Nick Black
--------------------------------
http://www.blacksworld.net




More information about the legal-talk mailing list