[OSM-legal-talk] Privacy and Terms

[Francis Davey]

2009/7/3 Elizabeth Dodd <edodd at billiau.net>:
>
> I can't really comprehend how "terms and conditions for use of a website" mean
> anything in the big real world.
> I'm over 50 years old, have university degrees and post graduate
> qualifications; i teach undergraduates and postgraduates in my field.
> However, I'm not stuck in academic clouds
> and putting terms and conditions on a website is bizarre.

Not at all - it depends on context and what you want those terms and
conditions to do. Many websites have terms and conditions (eg amazon
and tesco) and they do so because using those sites goes beyond just
having a browse but involves rather more interaction (including the
handing over of money). I want to be able to click on a button to buy
a book from amazon, so its useful for me to be able to come to an
agreement with amazon as to what that will mean.

In the case of OSM things don't go that far (importantly no money
changes hands) but users of the site can add content to it. Do you
want (in any way) to govern how they do that? Its noteworthy that the
use of google maps comes without any terms and conditions (that would
be legally binding anyway) but that (say) use of blogger.com *does*.

In deciding whether to have such a thing, what it should contain and
how to deploy it you need to understand what you think you are going
to get out of doing so, i.e. what you are trying to achieve by it.
That's something that a lawyer can't answer, they are only a
technician who can tell you if and how to do what you may or may not
want to do.

> I go to a website, i read, i look at pictures.
> I know quite well that the contents are either copy left or copyright and i
> should check before i copy anything.

That may be true, but if I want to attach a complex contractual
obligation on anyone who uses the data (which is what the new open
data licence will do) then I need to make sure that you know you are
agreeing to it. There's a difference between that and a pure copyright
licence since you don't have a right to use copyrighted material
without a licence (or some exception holding) so "I didn't know the
terms of the licence" won't help someone who wants to "steal" the
data, whereas if you want someone to be bound by a contract you have
to bring its terms to their attention.

So its not so simple as you say, if OSM wants to achieve what it
appears to be trying to achieve with its new licence model.

That of course is not the same question as the T&C's for use of the
website (which is a different matter) but I flag this up here as you
bring it up.

> Terms and conditions for use of a website - do we put terms and conditions on
> advertising posters governing who can read them?

No (though you will often see small print disclaimers on them). The
idea of restricting access to age 13+ strikes me as odd in the
extreme. When I get some time I'll do some research into what is going
on in the US that makes them do this.

> It's a public site, no passwords, no sign up required to read it, so it's for
> the public to read.

Not if you want to edit the data (as far as I can see anyway) then you
do have to sign up.

>
> Put the lawyer back in the cage.
>

Be nice 8-). This isn't (as far as I can see) about lawyers being unreasonable.

-- 
Francis Davey