[OSM-legal-talk] viral attribution and ODbL

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Mon Apr 19 19:15:58 BST 2010


TimSC wrote:
> 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

This is allowed.

> My question: where is the term that copyright notices must be preserved 
> done the chain of derived works?

There is no such term for produced works. To achieve an attribution 
chain, we would have to have something that says "you may only release 
produced works under a license that enforces an attribution chain". Im 
glad we don't because I consider attribution chains to be evil.

> 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.

We cannot import such data, even today, because we cannot make sure that 
the attribution is included in all derived works. So if you know of any 
such imports having taken place, they should be investigated and 
probably removed.

We do have a wiki page where we provide general attribution along the 
lines of "parts of OSM include data from X, Y, Z; thank you for that". 
But there is no rule, now or under ODbL, that requires people somehow 
incorporate that into their works.


Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

More information about the legal-talk mailing list