[OSM-legal-talk] Are CT contributors are in breach of the CC-BY-SA license?

John Smith deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com
Sun Apr 17 10:55:45 BST 2011


That would be a very narrow and strict interruption of cc-by-sa,
especially since the assumption is a derivative is required by the
user to generate any changes made when the source of their changes
would matter just as much.

For example if they are using GPS data all they would use existing
data for is to work out what doesn't need to be done.

Same would go for the Canadian mass import currently occurring,same
goes for other data imports such as OS.

The only time it would matter is for things like extrapolation the
position of streets based on the location of existing streets.

IANAL etc

On 4/17/11, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
> It would seem to me that anyone who has agreed to the contributor
> terms and who then edits content that is published by OSM is in breach
> of the CC-BY-SA license.
>
> Currently the OSM database is published as a CC-BY-SA work.  If that
> content is downloaded from the OSM database and modified then this
> creates a derived work.
>
> If that derived work is loaded back to OSM then it can only be done so
> under the same license by which it was received, namely CC-BY-SA.
> That's the nature of the share alike clause in CC-BY-SA.  But anyone
> who has agreed to the contributor terms is claiming that they can
> contribute this content under a different license.
>
> Now I know that it is the intention of OSMF to delete any such
> content, but in fact anyone who has edit such CC-BY-SA derived works
> is already in actual breach of the license under which they *received*
> that content.
>
> If you have agreed to the contributor terms you are likely to be
> breaching the terms of CC-BY-SA.
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device



More information about the legal-talk mailing list