[OSM-legal-talk] Concerns about ODbL

[Jean-Christophe Haessig]

Le lundi 02 mars 2009 à 13:58 +0000, Rob Myers a écrit :

> The licence discussion has been going on for a couple of *years* now.
> It needs resolving as soon as possible.

Sure. And the notice for earth’s destruction was displayed for at least
fifty years in the nearest office at Alpha Centauri ;)

> > * Waivers
> 
> As Frederik says, OSM exists to provide a free street map.

I’m afraid I don’t understand. You mean «OSM exists to provide a free
street map, and not provide attribution to its contributors», or as
Frederik, «removal of contributor’s names from the database was never
intended»?

Quoting the ODbL:

«a. For jurisdictions allowing waiver of moral rights, Licensor waives
all moral rights that Licensor may have in the Database to the fullest
extent possible by the law of the relevant jurisdiction under Section
10.4;»

Who is Licensor? Can someone explain this to me?

I surely understand that contributors’ names won’t disappear from OSM
itself, however with that clause, someone might make a copy of the
database, remove the names and redistribute it (only attributing to
OSM), which will in effect disable the users of this copy to find out
original contributors’ names.

> Advertising contributors' names is a bug of BY-SA, not a feature.

You mean that CC-BY-SA requires ALL names of the contributors to be
listed on a printed map? Why couldn’t OSM be viewed as a collective
work?
Music groups do publish their works under the group’s name, not the
names of all the members, and it doesn’t seem to cause problems…

JC
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20090302/7fa9590b/attachment.pgp>