[OSM-legal-talk] NearMap Community Licence and OSM Contributor Terms

[Frederik Ramm]

(moved over from talk)

Pierre-Alain Dorange wrote:
> So it seems you prefer a private compagny "stole" our works than a
> foundation (you can below to) represent the community ?

It would be good if we could refrain from using the word "stealing", it 
now occurs for the second time today.

The word "stealing" is commonly used if you illegally take something 
away from the rightful owner, thereby depriving him of using it further.

If someone uses our data under ODbL to make a "closed" produced work, 
they do not do so illegally. It is thus wrong to say "I don't want 
companies stealing OSM data that I contributed" because they would make 
legal use of the data, not illegal use.

Further, even if some were to illegally use our data, that would not be 
stealing as it would not deprive us of using it further. RIAA & Co. are 
trying to re-define these words ("copying a film is stealing!") but we 
should not succumb to their attempts at influencing our language.

It is also worth noting that if someone breaches an intellectual 
property license, in many jurisdictions you can only sue them for 
damages (i.e. lost revenue). So if you sell a music CD and someone 
distributes an illegal copy, you can try and sue them for the money you 
think you could have made by selling it yourself. If someone breaches 
your ODbL or CC-BY-SA, what are you going to sue him for?

Bye
Frederik