[OSM-legal-talk] Future relicensing in the contributor terms and data imports

[Emilie Laffray]

On 24 August 2010 11:18, James Livingston <lists at sunsetutopia.com> wrote:

> On 23/08/2010, at 4:22 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> > Not only the Contributor Terms - the whole project is. Data importing
> should always be the exception and not the rule.
>
> But is it though? I guess that's the nub of the issue with data imports and
> licensing - some people are against data imports and some people like them.
>
>
> Ignoring my personal view on whether imports are good or not, I think that
> we shouldn't have exceptions to the rule. I think we should either have a
> rule preventing imports (the *only* exception being for true PD, no
> copyright holder, data) or we shouldn't have that rule and imports are okay.
>
> If the rule is "no imports", then we should get rid of the Australian
> Government data, the AND data, the MassGIS data, the French castradal data,
> and so on. If the rule isn't "no imports", then we need to deal with the
> fact they are going to happen and determine how to best fit it all in with
> licensing.
>

The French cadastral information is mostly tracing from a WMS, so I would
find it difficult to consider it an import. If you do then you would need to
remove also Yahoo and the rest :)

Emilie Laffray
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20100824/804660f2/attachment.html>