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

80n 80n80n at gmail.com
Thu Sep 16 21:26:15 BST 2010


On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 8:25 PM, Grant Slater
<openstreetmap at firefishy.com>wrote:

> On 16 September 2010 19:29, Dave F. <davefox at madasafish.com> wrote:
> >  On 16/09/2010 16:43, Robert Whittaker (OSM) wrote:
> >>
> >> If it isn't will this mean previous traced/imported Opendata will have
> to
> >> be removed?
> >> If the incompatibilities in the licenses / CTs are not resolved before
> >> the OSM license change goes ahead, then as far as I can see, the only
> >> option would be to remove all OS OpenData derived mapping from OSM.
> >
> > This saddens me.
> >
> > I find it hard to conceive that members of OSM were lobbying the
> > OS/Government to release data for public use, whilst at the same time (by
> > the same people?) creating a new license that's incompatible with it.
> >
>
> This clashes with the legal advice giving to the Licensing Working
> Group in that OS OpenData's license _is_ compatible with ODbL and the
> Contributor Terms. Specifically section 4 of the Contributor Terms
> provides a mechanism for attribution.
>

Grant, who is giving you legal advice?  Can you quote (or paraphrase) the
advice you have been given please?




>
> I have asked Robert if he could share the email with the LWG, it would
> be interesting to see the question asked and the full legal reasoning.
>
> Regards
>  Grant
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20100916/ddcbf179/attachment.html>


More information about the legal-talk mailing list