[OSM-legal-talk] public transport routing and OSM-ODbL

Richard Fairhurst richard at systemed.net
Thu Jul 8 16:14:48 BST 2010


Liz wrote:
> Anything this contrived and complex that the potential users can't sort 
> it out fails the usability test.

There are only three possible data licences that aren't complex:

1. You may do anything you like with the data. (=PD)

2. You may do anything you like with the data. We ask you to be nice and
credit us, and to release any data you mix up with it. (=PD + Science
Commons-like community norms)

3. This data is for your own personal use only. Anything else, you have to
ask us. Sign on the dotted line to consent to this contract, and we'll let
you access the data. (=proprietary)

Anything else has to be complex in order to apply across wildly different
jurisdictions. There ain't no Berne Convention for data and there is
remarkably little case law, especially relating to a database with so many
authors. You simply cannot write an open data licence which is legally
enforceable the world over without some complexity. It's not ODbL's fault -
it's the inevitable result of the OSM community not managing to agree to 1
or 2.

OSM is a pragmatic community. We're better when we're trying to move forward
than when we're just sitting around bitching. Either come up with
suggestions to make ODbL and the Community Terms work better, or campaign,
actively, for a move to 1 or 2.

cheers
Richard
-- 
View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-public-transport-routing-and-OSM-ODbL-tp5265671p5270572.html
Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.




More information about the legal-talk mailing list