[OSM-legal-talk] viral attribution and ODbL
mapping at sheerman-chase.org.uk
Mon Apr 19 18:46:33 BST 2010
I am back to trying to get my head around ODbL. I am now wondering about
attribution and the viral nature of it. Apologies if this has been
raised before. Many licenses have a term stating the copyright notice
must be preserved (ignoring for a moment that copyright is probably not
approprate for databases). Examples include the X11 license and the
CC-BY license (term 4b in
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode). From memory,
CC-BY-SA also has this condition, but I am not certain. Ok, so we might
create a produced work and release it under the public domain. I could
foresee a scenario:
1) Create a produced work under ODbL term 4.3 with proper attribution
2) Release produced work as public domain with proper attribution
3) Strip off legal notices and attribution (which I think is allowed,
almost by definition, for public domain works)
4) Republish as public domain or any other license, without attribution
My question: where is the term that copyright notices must be preserved
done the chain of derived works? ODbL term 4.3 only protects us as far
as step 1 in the above example. And if we must insist on attribution
being retained, are we saying we can't release ODbL produced works into
the public domain?
The use case touches on this issue but mainly with respect to trying to
reverse engineer the database. I think attribution is a separate issue.
The comment in the use case document pretty much implies that this could
be an issue.
Second issue, which is probably the flip side of the same coin: people
might be inclined to use works that use some sort of attribution license
and incorperate them into OSM (this almost certainly has already
happened, OS opendata, etc). The attribution must be included in any
derived works. Now this seems incompatible with the contributor terms,
which grants OSMF an unlimited license. So, I can't add any "viral
attribution" data via the contributor terms, as OSMF might one day try
to change its attribution terms, since it is not bound to only use ODbL.
It would seem to be that the contributor terms would at least put the
viral attribution condition on the OSMF. The worst case scenario is the
contributor terms cannot accept any data with an attribution condition.
Hopefully that is not the case! Is that interpretation any way valid,
interesting, cross eyed? If the answer is already out there, just link
to it. Thanks!
More information about the legal-talk