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

[Rob Myers]

On 09/17/2010 01:12 AM, 80n wrote:
>
> That's a bit of a jump isn't it? Firstly, the CTs allow you to
> change the license without any regard to preserving the attribution
> clause.

If they do, and if attribution is ever removed, data contributed under
an agreement to maintain attribution couldn't be used.

So a future evil OSM couldn't suddenly start publishing OS materials
without attribution.

> Secondly, the ODbL doesn't require attribution to Ordnance Survey,
> only to OSM.  Thirdly I'm not yet convinced that ODbL's attribution

ODbL 4.2.c requires that the copyright notices be maintained when 
distributing the database. This would include the attribution required 
by OS.

ODbL 4.3 requires a notice on Produced Works that mentions the source of 
the data through a url. The page linked to by the url can mention 
attribution. BY allows this, and OS data is explicitly declared to be BY 
compatible.

An OSM map on a postcard under BY-SA 3.0 derived from ODbL data will
advertise OS data just as much as an OSM map on a postcard under BY-SA
3.0 derived from BY-SA data will. Both will carry a mention of the
licence and a url that links to a page explains the licence and
attribution for the tile.

> is viral.  A sublicensee of a Produced Work has no obligations that I
> can see.

It will be the practical upshot of just about any licencing of a 
produced work I can think of but I agree that it does not appear to be 
mandated.

I'll ask odc-discuss.

- Rob.