[OSM-legal-talk] Rights granted to OSMF (Section 2 of the CT)

Eugene Alvin Villar seav80 at gmail.com
Sun Apr 17 06:17:46 BST 2011

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 1:00 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 17 April 2011 14:39, Eugene Alvin Villar <seav80 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Clearly this is not that big a problem for Apache contributors, why
>> should it be a big problem for OSM contributors (setting aside the
>> desire to import other data for which the contributor has no right to
>> sublicense)?
> Apache has been a mature project for quite some time, what you should
> be asking instead is why did others go for GPL for their httpd.
> In any case this sort of clause is most common with projects like
> google map maker, In fact until recently this was a reason used to
> promote OSM, the fact that it didn't use the same terms as google map
> maker.

The point still stands. Granting rights to a central body (but not
your copyright--you still retain that) is not unheard of in open

I personally have not used the reason you state to promote OSM over
GMM. I have always emphasized in my outreach that you can use OSM data
in more ways than GMM's data (such as using OSM data to create Garmin
maps--Garmin is the most popular PND brand in my country).

I understand though that some may have used the "no central body" as a
promotional banner, but that is a really poor method since the FSF and
ASF has had copyright assignment and rights grants respectively for a
long time now.

More information about the legal-talk mailing list