[OSM-legal-talk] per changeset relicensing

[David Groom]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Weait" <richard at weait.com>
To: "Licensing and other legal discussions." <legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2011 9:38 PM
Subject: [OSM-legal-talk] per changeset relicensing


>
> There have been previous discussions regarding "per changeset 
> relicensing".
>
> I'd like to know if developing the tools to allow per changeset
> relicensing is worthwhile.  There will be some effort involved in the
> coding, so it would be good to know in advance if this option will be
> used by many or few mappers.

+1 from me

For instance I have nearly 8,000 changesets under one of my usre accounts 
but at present I don't think I can agree to the CT's for that user account.

However I'd be very surprised if less than 80% of those changesets were ODbL 
compliant, and I suspect that as far as the percentage of actual data 
contributed under those changesets the figure is even higher than 80%.

It would be a real shame to lose so much data (and so much of my work)

Personally I'd find it useful to be able to mark changesets as ODbL 
compliant or not.

First thoughts are that ideally I'd like:

1) the ability to mark all changesets before a certain date as ODbL 
compliant;
2) remaining changesets to be shown say 20 per page, and the ability to tag 
these individually or to "select all " 20 and mark as ODbL compliant.

David


>
> The intent of per changeset relicensing is to permit those with a
> general agreement to the terms and license, but with a specific
> concern about a source for a particular changeset to relicense their
> data, but not relicense that data about which they are concerned.
>
> Example:
>
> Prof. Mapper maps by GPS and survey as she travels.  She also helped a
> friend map in Erehwon, and added street names from Erehwon Council
> data.  Erehwon council have given permission for derivation to OSM
> under CC-By-SA, but discussion is continuing re: CT/ODbL, Prof. Mapper
> agrees with CT/ODbL but recognizes that She doesn't have permission
> yet to relicense the Erehwon street names.
>
> Prof. Mapper could accept CT/ODbL for the bulk of her mapping, and
> mark the seven Erehwon changesets a with a checkbox for Do Not
> Relicense and with a note, "Pending Erehwon Council permission".
>
> This allows several options in the future. It points out datasets and
> mappers with interest in discussing relicensing with a specific data
> provider.  Should Erehwon Council agree to ODbL prior to any change
> over date, the data can be included. If not, Prof. Mapper may continue
> with their unencumbered data.
>
>
>
> http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WFVK6XS
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
>