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

[Grant Slater]

On 17 April 2011 16:56, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Francis Davey <fjmd1a at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 17 April 2011 13:30, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> The question is whether you can upload a CC-BY-SA licensed work under
>>> any other license than CC-BY-SA?
>>
>> I am sorry if I misunderstood your original question. I am not quite
>> sure I understand this one. What do you mean by "upload .. .under" a
>> licence? That doesn't make sense to me. Do you mean, "does CC-BY-SA"
>> permit a contributor to contribute to OSMF under the existing
>> contributor terms? (Answer: no) or do you mean something else?
>
> Sorry, I was using jargon here which probably only makes sense to
> those very familiar with the OSM context.  I'll try to make myself a
> little clearer.
>
> Suppose there is a creative work that has been published with a
> CC-BY-SA license.  Suppose I take that work and make from it a
> derivative work.  Can I then give a copy of that derivative work to a
> third party who insists that it is provided to them under an agreement
> that is like the OSM Contributor Terms 1.2.4?
>
> In other words, if I've agreed to the current contributor terms, does
> the act of submitting CC-BY-SA licensed content to OSM voilate the
> terms of the CC-BY-SA license?
>
> As a bit of background, the process of modifying the OSM map is a
> three step process:
> 1) A user gets a subset of the map from the OSM web-site
> 2) The user makes modifications to that map on their own computer
> 3) The user gives the modifications back to OSMF via the OSM web-site.
>
> All content within the OSM database is published as CC-BY-SA 2.0.
> This extends comprehensively however it is obtained.  There is no
> special route that content takes when someone wants to edit something.
>  They request a subset of the map (step 1) which is downloaded to the
> user's computer where they then modify it (step 2).  This subset is
> licensed under CC-BY-SA just like any other content from OSM and their
> modifications are a Derivative Work.
>
> When user has finished modifying the map they then send it back to OSM
> (step 3) and in doing so they affirm that the modified content is
> granted to OSMF under a "worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive,
> perpetual, irrevocable licence", or whatever the version of the
> contributor terms are that they originally signed up to.
>
> It seems to me that the CTs get in the way of the loop that is
> supposed to exist that permits someone to get OSM content, modify it,
> and then give it back.  If the content in this loop is CC-BY-SA
> licensed then putting up a CT gateway or barrier would appear to break
> that loop.
>
>>

80n see: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/315754580/history
This is just silly. jumped-the-license yet? Are you going to start
suing fellow OSM contributors now? Kindly sue me, you know my address.

Regards
 Grant