[OSM-legal-talk] Potential huge License violation - anyone know anything about this?

Oliver (skobbler) osm.oliver.kuehn at gmx.de
Thu Jun 3 14:51:34 BST 2010


>Don't get me wrong, as long as we have this license we should insist on
>people following it, if only to respect our work. But by making
>comparisons like the above you're already playing what I like to call
>the "music industry game", which is neatly illustrated here:

The music (and software) industry already gets nervous when people are
consuming the content for free. They ignore the fact that most people
wouldn't have spent money to purchase the content as they consume it only as
long as the costs are zero.

In regards to OSM I think there is big difference between a breach of
license where just the ego of members of community is harmed and someone is
taking financial advantage by a breaching of license. I was trying to make
suggestion that the first one can even lead to an advantage to OSM and the
latter should lead to consequences.

It might be that my proposal doesn't work as every contributor could take
legal action and therefore a statement of the OSMF would be void. However, I
still thinks it makes more sense to come up with a generic process rather
than to discuss every case of a lack of attribution with 100 posts.

View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-Potential-huge-License-violation-anyone-know-anything-about-this-tp5132343p5135228.html
Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the legal-talk mailing list