[OSM-legal-talk] Factual Information License and Produced Works?

[Ulf Möller]

80n schrieb:

> As far as I know there has been no attention paid to the FIL.  It was 
> grabbed at the last minute from here 

It doesn't look like it has been reviewed thoroughly (and the co-ment 
page seem to be password protected.)

The requirement to include a copy of the license pretty much defeats the 
ODbL clause according to which a hyperlink is sufficient for a Produced 
Work. So an image description would read "This image contains 
information from OpenStreetMap, which is made available here under the 
Open Database Licence (ODbL)", followed by the 760 word Factual 
Information License. That would sort of work on a Wikipedia image 
description page, but a newspaper would probably rather use the space to 
print two or three other stories.

The license should allow modification for any purpose, but they only 
mention "modifying the Work as may be technically necessary to use it in 
a different mode or format".

The disclaimer is different from the ODbL one. Either the ODbL 
disclaimer is unnecessarily verbose, or something is missing in this one.

Also the license once uses "Database" where it should say "Work", and 
capitalization for defined words is used inconsistently.