[OSM-legal-talk] license change effect on un-tagged nodes

[Simon Poole]

Am 06.07.2011 20:31, schrieb John Smith:
> On 6 July 2011 18:20, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
> <g.gremmen at cetest.nl>  wrote:
>> [<GG>] I was not talking about copyright. Copyright laws are of no use
>> in the digital era,
> You were talking about databases, however databases can still store
> copyrightable content, in this case it's copyright that we're talking
> about, if copyright weren't an issue the database could just be
> relicensed, but there is copyright involved so it can't.

No, no, no,  we are going through this slow  and painful process because 
the OSMF stated
that it would  ask each contributor to re-license their data, simply 
because that's the
right thing to do.

That does not imply that individual contributors actually hold any 
rights in the data they
contributed.  As we know, that is a difficult question and depends on 
jurisdiction and so
on, and my take on it would be: probably not. For all practical purposes 
we are simply
pretending that such rights exist and it just doesn't make sense to 
spend hours arguing
about if moving a node creates a derivative work, because again -we are 
just pretending-.

Because the whole thing is more an ethical question than a legal one, I 
have suggested
before (on talk-de) the following resolution objects (points and ways) 
created by CT accepters
stay in, in all version, objects  created by CT objectors get thrown out 
in all versions. Nice and
symmetric and equally distributes the pain.

Simon