[OSM-legal-talk] How to deal with CC 2.0 data imports? Proposal Dual licensing of data under odbl-1.0

[Simon Ward]

On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 11:28:05AM -0700, Kai Krueger wrote:
> There appear to be some interesting thoughts about this in the most recent
> LWG meeting minutes ( https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_89cczk73gk )
> in the Contributor Terms Revision section:
> 
> e.g.
> 
> "If you want to import data copyrighted by others or where they are exerting
> a copyright over data that you have derived by a method such as tracing, the
> copyright should be compatible with ODbL 1.0.  You do not need to guarantee
> that the copyright will be compatible with future licenses as may be adopted
> under clause  4 below, but you should be aware that it may then be necessary
> to delete such Content."

If exceptions can be made for imports then why not also do so for
“normal” user contributions?  I would go so far as asking why the
relicensing clause needs to be there in the first place (again) given
that exceptions are easily allowed, but since we are talking about
compromises, I would gladly accept the option to opt out of the clause.

In any case, if I host my data elsewhere, and then “import” it into
OpenStreetMap, do I get around this, or am I just being too hopeful?

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20101030/41f82446/attachment.pgp>