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

Eugene Alvin Villar seav80 at gmail.com
Sun Apr 17 11:50:57 BST 2011


I guess your argument hinges on whether uploading data to the OSM
servers is a form of "publishing" in terms of copyright.

If you create a work and never publish it (in other words, nobody else
will see it), then it is not yet copyrighted. Even works for hire are
not copyrighted until the hiring entity publishes it.

Again, IANAL, but submitting data to the OSM server where it is
*immediately* published via the OSM API and *immediately* made
available to the public licensed as CC-BY-SA, doesn't put the
contributor in breach of the CC license. Since the publishing doesn't
occur until the data is made available via the OSM API (and the OSM
Planet), then I believe there is no problem.


On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 6:23 PM, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar <seav80 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> IANAL, but as long as the data is currently being released as
>> CC-BY-SA, then there is no breach of the CC license.
>
> Clause 4 of CC-BY-SA 2.0 only permits you to distribute copies of a
> deriviative work under the terms of the CC-BY-SA license.
>
> Uploading the derived work to OSM is a form of distribution.  This can
> only be done under CC-BY-SAQ.
>
> You do not have the right to distribute the content to OSM on the
> terms required by the CTs.
>
>
>>
>> CC-BY-SA only stipulates that the data, when published, must be under
>> CC-BY-SA. It doesn't say that you cannot enter contracts promising to
>> release the data *in the future* under another license.
>
> You can indeed enter into a contract with OSMF but you cannot
> distribute CC-BY-SA content to them under the terms of that agreement.
>  Arguably, users who have previously agreed that all their
> contributions to OSM are CC-BY-SA might still be covered by that as
> the CTs do not explicitly override that pre-existing agreement.
>
> The CTs require you to grant rights to OSMF that, for CC-BY-SA
> licensed content, you do not have.  What OSMF subsequently proposes to
> do is irrelevant.
>
>>
>> If the data will be released *in the future* under a different
>> license, then it's true that the CC license is breached.
>
> Agreed, this issue is with users attempting to grant rights to OSMF
> now, not in the future, that they do not have.  Contributors, not
> OSMF, are in breach of CC-BY-SA if they distribute CC-BY-SA derived
> contributions to OSM having agreed to the CTs.
>
> They are attempting to distribute content to OSM under an agreement
> that is not CC-BY-SA and they just plain cannot do that.
>
>>
>> But, in the case of OSM-ODbL, assuming that all the ODbL rejectors' IP
>> will be removed before the actual relicensing, since what remains is
>> the IP of all who have agreed to the CT, then it's like everyone
>> mutually agreed to relicense their own data under a new license, thus,
>> not breaching the CC license.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 5:39 PM, 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>



-- 
http://vaes9.codedgraphic.com



More information about the legal-talk mailing list