[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Missing Openaerial map from Potlatch

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

> Probably the biggest thing I've learned about copyright since getting  
> involved with OSM is how easy it is to overstate your rights as  
> copyright holder.

Most do it because they don't know better. (Some don't even write the
name "Microsoft" in a public article because tehy somehow think that
they might need permission for that.) Some also do it maliciously
(Scientology's stock method of silencing critics is to argue that
their criticism is based on copyrighted material).

I think the Science Commons guys have a rather enlightened viewpoint
when they say (on http://sciencecommons.org/resources/faq/databases/):

(quote)

We recommend that database providers make it clear that only some
elements of their database are protected by copyright (and subject to
a Creative Commons license) and some elements are free to be used &
reused outside of the license.

As you know, Creative Commons and Science Commons work to promote
freely available content and information. Our preference is that
people do not overstate their copyright or other legal rights.
Consequently, we adopt the position that “facts are free” and people
should be educated so that they are aware of this. Database providers
may want to think about including a statement where you include your
Creative Commons “Some Rights Reserved” button that acknowledges that
the database is only under a Creative Commons license “to the extent
that copyright protects the database” and then give some examples of
the elements in the database that are likely to be factual and
excluded from the scope of copyright and the Creative Commons license.

(unqoute)

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"