[OSM-legal-talk] A very brief brief for our new licence

Iván Sánchez Ortega ivan at sanchezortega.es
Sat Sep 27 23:34:54 BST 2008

El Sábado, 27 de Septiembre de 2008, Frederik Ramm escribió:
> Hi,
> > 2) Ensure that if people use the OSM dataset within any publically
> > available work that they should attribute OSM in the resulting work
> > appropriately for the medium, the space available and the relative
> > significance of the OSM data to their final work unless they receive a
> > formal request from the foundation for the work not to be attributed.
> Is it meant as a way for users to get a carte blanche from the
> Foundation that they don't have to do attribution, or is it meant as a
> way for the foundation to suppress attribution in certain cases? Both
> would be questionable in my eyes.

Having read the ODbL, my understanding is that section 4.3 (attribution when 
using data from the DB in a non-DB) is *not* waivable. In other words, the 
OSMF alone can not allow any party to not attribute OSM.

(The only way to do that would be that every single contributor for the data 
used should multi-license his/her data under a non-attribution license)

Resistance is futile. You will be attributed.

On the other hand...

El Sábado, 27 de Septiembre de 2008, Peter Miller escribió:
> 3) It should allow people to do anything within reason they like with the
> OSM dataset so long as they comply with 1) and 2) and do not bring OSM into
> disrepute.

I disagree with Peter here - the ODbL explicitly waives all moral rights. 
There would be absolutely no way to prevent people from saying "OMGWTFBBQ! 
OSM is a crap full of errors!!".

(I don't know if the moral rights waiver (which includes waiving the right to 
be attributed as the author) would interfere with the attribution clause - 
I'd need a lawyer to unsderstand that bit).

IMHO (IANAL, TINLA) the Open Database License *plus* Factual Information 
License duo (ODbL+FIL) can be summarized as:

- The individual pieces of data that make OSM up are facts. Facts are free.

- If you are making a "Database" with data taken from OSM, you have to publish 
the data back. This ensures that improvements to the OSM dataset benefit 
everyone. "Database" can mean a relational DB, a plain text file, or any 
large extract of raw or processed OSM data.

- If you're making an "Integrated Experience" with data taken from OSM, you 
just have to tell everyone just so. You don't have to give anything back. 
This ensures freedom to use OSM data in more ways. "Integrated Experience" 
can mean an OpenLayers mash-up, a pretty map render, or a printed map with 
stuff on top.

I'm still baffled by the term "integrated experience", as it has no clear 
definition. Let's see if the peer reviews of the ODbL drafts clarify those 

Iván Sánchez Ortega <ivan at sanchezortega.es>

A:	Dr. Livingston I. Presume.
Q:	What's Dr. Presume's full name?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20080928/6ec1bdf4/attachment.pgp>

More information about the legal-talk mailing list