[OSM-legal-talk] some interesting points from the bing license

[David Groom]

> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Anthony" <osm at inbox.org>
> To: "Licensing and other legal discussions." 
> <legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 12:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] some interesting points from the bing 
> license
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 6:34 AM, David Groom <reviews at pacific-rim.net> 
> wrote:
>> Whereabouts is the "prior written consent from Microsoft" which would 
>> enable
>> us to trace and thus create derivative works?
>>
>> David
>>
>> [1] http://opengeodata.org/microsoft-imagery-details
>
> Isn't http://opengeodata.org/microsoft-imagery-details the "prior
> written consent from Microsoft".
>

I'm not sure it is, or certainly if it is enough.

1) I don't actually see anywhere where it says you can derive works from the 
imagery.
2) In fact what you CAN do is specified very little, the agreement has far 
more about what you CANT do.
3) Its not even clear to me that [1] applies to end users, ie those who are 
using Potlatch, JOSM etc,  the agreement in [1] seems much more applicable 
to the developers of Potlatch etc

4) Given that document [2] IS very clear that you cant create derivative 
works, if document [1] is intended to give the written consent then I think 
it need's to do so in a clear and unambiguous manner.

David