[OSM-legal-talk] OS Opendata & the new license

[David Groom]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dave F." <davefox at madasafish.com>
To: "Licensing and other legal discussions." <legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2010 3:47 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OS Opendata & the new license


>
>  On 16/09/2010 15:08, David Groom wrote:
>>
>>
>> When you say "new licence" what do you mean exactly? Do you mean the ODbL 
>> licence on its own , or the ODbL combined with the proposed CT's.
>
> I was under the impression they were joined at the hip & you can't have 
> one without the other. Am I wrong?
>

Well people are currently signing up under the CT's, yet OSM data is 
currently still CC-BY-SA, so they are not entirely "joined at the hip"

According to the wiki [1] compatability of OS StreetView data with the Ct's 
is subject to a legal review which will take place soon.  I assume that the 
licence / CT issues are the same for all OS Opendata.

>
>>
>> If you inlcude the CT's, then do you mean CT version1.0 which people are 
>> currently signing up to, or the working draft of a new version 1.1?
>
> Well, let's say both & do a contrast & compare.
> Is the new shiny 1.1 going to make a difference?

Differences are outlined on the working draft, see link below.

>
> Let's also include people like me, who signed up a year ago (non CT) but 
> have been exploiting the OS data since it was made available.
>
> Err... Do you have a link to CT1.1? Can't find it in wiki search. All 
> links goto 1.0
>
https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_81272pvt54

David

> Cheers
> Dave F.
>

[1] 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue#Digital_Recified_Maps