[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

[Andreas Perstinger]

On 2010-12-08 17:23, Anthony wrote:
> Then no one should own the database right.

So we're back at the status quo which is in my opinion not the best 
option (many uncertainties).

> The OSMF certainly should
> not, because a very small portion of contributors are members of the
> OSMF.

I agree with you that more contributors should be members of the OSMF 
but I assume most do not really care (that's my real life experience 
with other organisations).

 > And it's not really any better for the OSM community as a whole
> to own the database right, especially under a "one person, one vote"
> scenario.  Why should two people who contribute one node a month be
> able to override the wishes of one person who contributes 10 million
> nodes a month?

In your example it looks bad for the one person but in general I'm not 
afraid of a 2/3 majority.

> This also has the advantage of creating a
> situation where people in some jurisdictions don't have advantages to
> people in other jurisdictions.

As long as there are no common world rules there will always be 
differences. Should we therefore just work in our own countries?

> In any case, who would you say owns the database right *right now*?

That's the problem, nobody really knows. I would guess the owner of 
www.openstreetmap.org.

> How do the CTs change this?

The make clear that OSMF claims the right for the database.

>>> Who "owns" Wikipedia?
>>
>> I think there is a big difference between a project like Wikipedia (where
>> the single texts are copyright protected) and OSM (where most/all of the
>> data is not copyright protected).
>
> Agreed.  But that doesn't answer my question.

I don't know :-). Wikimedia Foundation? I don't really care about them :-).

Bye, Andreas