[OSM-legal-talk] CTs and the 1 April deadline

[David Groom]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Fairhurst" <richard at systemed.net>
To: <legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 4:48 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CTs and the 1 April deadline


>
>
> John Smith wrote:
>> Thanks for the clarification. In your opinion, what would be the
>> minimum license rendered images could be licensed as?
>
> An attribution-only licence - CC-BY, for example.
>
>> If attribution will also be required on tiles, you have a chain of
>> attribution that can be followed
>
> Right, yes.
>
>> if data is licensed in future so
>> that at least produced data doesn't have an attribution requirement
>
> I don't think it can be - the agreement between OSMF and the Contributor 
> to
> attribute is perpetual, rather than being subject to any future licence
> change - but even if it were, CT 1.2.2 puts the onus on OSMF to remove the
> data in the case of incompatibility, rather than on the Contributor to

Actually it does not put the onus on OSMF to remove the data.  It says they 
"may" remove the data, it doesn't say they will remove the data, or even 
that they will make any attempt to remove it.  Indeed I'm sure it has been 
argued by others that putting the onus on OSMF to remove the data is placing 
"too high a burden" on OSMF.

David

> safeguard against all future possibilities.
>
> Richard
>
>
> -- 
> View this message in context: 
> http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-CTs-and-the-1-April-deadline-tp5887879p5889351.html
> Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
>