[OSM-legal-talk] Refusing CT but declaring contributions as PD

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Wed Aug 24 15:09:27 BST 2011


On 08/24/11 16:03, Simon Poole wrote:
> I think I've said this before, but any way you look at it, there is a big
> difference between TimSC and the US Census Bureau. I just can't
> see how we could use a mappers data without some kind of assurance
> that the mapper actually has the rights necessary to make their
> contributions PD or a similar equivalent. Since such an agreement
> is unlikely to be much simpler than the CTs, it just doesn't make sense
> to go and produce yet another agreement for these special cases.

One of the PD-but-not-CT-people said something like "I don't want to 
give any kind of explicit assurance/permission to OSMF". I.e. they don't 
want a contract with OSMF. But I think that could be remedied by 
offering them a differently worded declaration to "sign", one that would 
subsume the CTs but not be specific to OSMF.

Such a document might well be more complex than the CTs but simplicity 
or complexity does not seem to be the issue.


More information about the legal-talk mailing list