[OSM-legal-talk] Why is the data protected?

[Rob Myers]

On 11/28/2010 07:51 PM, Andreas Perstinger wrote:

> As I understand it, we build a database which we fill with coordinates
> and their tags. Because of the license change some (or most or all?)

A very vocal minority.

> are
> afraid that we loose data from the users who don't sign the new CT or
> don't like the new license.
> But why?

One concern some people have is that large datasets donated to or 
imported into the project will either be unable to be relicenced or will 
take several years to be relicenced.

I would argue that the licences of other projects are their own concern 
and that this should not prevent OSM from using the right licence as a 
project in its own right.

> Isn't the content the users provide just facts (at least the
> coordinates, some tags could be questionable)?

Well the tags are an important part of the whole. :-)

It's important to remember that OSM is an international project, and 
that the law covering data and databases is much less standardized 
internationally than it is for artistic works or software. How much 
originality you need in a database in order to claim copyright over it 
is an open question in much of the world (including America and 
Australia, the two places where people are most adamant that it is 
resolved). And then there's the database right.

Here's OKF's guide to the rights that can cover databases internationally:

http://www.opendefinition.org/guide/data/

> Why is there a problem to
> distribute the database from day x on under the new license regardless
> if the users accepted the new CT or not?

That would alienate people and could lead to legal action.

Either would be a sufficient reason not to do it.

- Rob.