[OSM-legal-talk] A simplification of the agreement on the signup page.

[Rob Myers]

On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Simon Ward <simon at bleah.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 11:30:41AM -0500, Russ Nelson wrote:
>> Creative Commons license (by-sa). or under the ODbL. If you choose not to
>> give us your email address, or your email address stops working, you
>> waive all right to ownership of your edits.
>
> This needs a safeguard to allow for email addresses temporarily not
> working.  I’m not even sure this is the right thing to do anyway.  It’s
> far safer getting rid of a user’s data than it is assuming ownership of
> it.

GPL-licenced Free Software projects can use two safeguards against
losing track of contributors.

Firstly, licencing code under "Version X or later" of the GPL. CC's
licences include this option automatically in the licence itself as
the "upgrade clause". With the GPL, you trust that Stallman won't
suddenly decide that the GPL needs to give everyone's code to
Microsoft for their proprietary use, with the CC licences they
explicitly state that the new licence must have only the same modules
as the existing licence.

Secondly, getting copyright assignments from contributors.

I can't see OSM going for assignment (of whatever rights), but
accepting contributions under "version X or later of the licence"
would allow OSM to take advantage of version 5 of the ODbL to handle
the WIPO Universal Database Copyright Act of 2030.

- Rob.