[OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
g.gremmen at cetest.nl
Wed Aug 10 11:33:55 BST 2011
It's all a matter of trust.
A) Trusting contributors and
b) trusting the users of OSM data.
The current policy of OSM is to trust nobody,
and therefore OSM(F) is seeking legal certainty,
by creating licenses and contributor terms.
It will probably take a long time for those
seeking this way that it is a way without issue.
First because legal certainty does not exist in
a society where justice is dominated by (financial) power.
( see Dominique Strauss Kahn case for a recent example )
Second because the legal certainty created by
the CT is uncertain because it is badly written, and one needs not be
a specialist to understand that; and the use of OdBl is so unprecedented
that we are completely unclear if it will hold in ANY case but the
Third because we don't not have the financial means to maintain
the license in even the smallest case.
OSMF will probably go bankrupt on the first case against an
fraudulent user of the data.
You ever read the story of the emperor's new clothes ? (=read CT)
That is what comes to mind if we look at OSM legal position.
And that is how the whole world is looking at us (if
they actually do matter to look)
I a world where legal certainty dominates trust, justice
is far away, and that is what's happening now.
Van: Simon Poole [mailto:simon at poole.ch]
Verzonden: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 11:43 AM
Aan: legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Am 10.08.2011 11:29, schrieb Nic Roets:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:50 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
> Gremmen<g.gremmen at cetest.nl> wrote:
>> PD data does not need a
>> complicated and binding CT as the current one.
> True. But PD is "forward" compatible with the CTs. For example, we did
> not need to ask the upstream authors of TIGER to accept the CTs.
That is naturally the case because we have a well known source and
to be very sure that the data is actually really PD in the case of the
In the case of an individual mappers contribution we have a very
where essentially we would need the same level of agreement as the
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
More information about the legal-talk