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

[David Groom]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rob Myers" <rob at robmyers.org>
To: <legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 3:08 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OS Opendata & the new license


>
> On 09/17/2010 02:46 PM, David Groom wrote:
>>
>> In effect you are saying not to worry about the legal requirements in
>> the CT's, but rather to rely upon the idea that in the future OSMF will
>> behave in a certain way.
>
> I am assuming that in the future OSMF will read the CTs and pause to think 
> before breaking the terms of an agreement that is the only thing allowing 
> them to use contributions.

In what way are you suggesting OSMF would breach the CT's?  I've certainly 
never suggested they would do such a thing.

>
>> So your whole premise that its OK to add data which requires attribution
>> on the basis the data will be removed if the attribution requirement is
>> removed rests upon:
>>
>> a) the assumption that its OK to break the legal requirements of the
>> CT's because of an implied assumption about how the OSMF will behave in
>> the future
>
> I don't understand this point, sorry.

By agreeing to the CT's you "legally" agree to do certain things.  One of 
those is that data you add will not infringe any third parties rights. 
Where data you are submitting is based on CC-BY-SA type data, one of those 
"rights" is that there will be attribution on the data. However, as the CT's 
allow in the future "any free and open licence" to be chosen, then legally 
you would be in breach of the CT's by adding CC-BY-SA data, because you cant 
guarantee the attribution requirement which is required under CC-BY-SA.

I thought you were saying that you think that it is OK to do add such data, 
on the assumption that OSMF would remove data in the future.

Hopefully you know understand the point, if not maybe someone else will be 
able to explain it to you better than I can.

David

>
>> b) the assumption that all data which requires attribution will be
>> tagged as such (and there is no requirement at present for it to do so,
>> just good practice)
>>
>> c) the assumption that the attribution tag cant be changed.
>>
>> That seems a lot of assumptios to me.
>
> Attribution will need some technical means of recording and 
> representation.
>
> I'm not assuming tags cannot be changed. That was an example. Better 
> examples can clearly be found. :-)
>
> - Rob.
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
>