[OSM-legal-talk] viral attribution and ODbL

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason avarab at gmail.com
Mon Apr 19 21:28:27 BST 2010


On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 20:08, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> > I
think there is a difference, certainly morally but even legally. If
> you submit, under CC-BY-SA, data to an online map which clearly does not
> give the names of all contributors, and later claim that the map was
> violating your terms, that is something different from publishing your
> data on a web page under CC-BY-SA and then complaining that someone took
> it, put it in a web map, and didn't provide attribution.

When you sign up to OpenStreetMap you agree to license your
contributions under the CC-BY-SA 2.0. The license includes sections
like:

    "You must keep intact all copyright notices for the Work and give
    the Original Author credit reasonable to the medium"

I happen to think that the openstreetmap.org website gives credit
"reasonable to the medium" via Planet dumps, the history feature in
Potlatch and viewing details for individual objects at /browse/*
pages.

But this idea that the state of how openstreetmap.org fulfilled parts
of the CC-BY-SA at the time of signup somehow modifies what the
licensor can expect sounds very dubious.

I've never heard something like this argued in any license debate. It
would be interesting to see what the Creative Commons lawyers think
about this.




More information about the legal-talk mailing list