[OSM-legal-talk] [talk-au] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap

[David Groom]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ben Last" <ben.last at nearmap.com>
To: "David Groom" <reviews at pacific-rim.net>; "OSM Australian Talk List" 
<talk-au at openstreetmap.org>; "Licensing and other legal discussions." 
<legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 12:48 AM
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of 
derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap


> On 15 June 2011 19:52, David Groom <reviews at pacific-rim.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> sorry to be pedantic, but when you say "the second paragraph allows edits
>> submitted before the 17th of  June 2011 under CC-BY-SA (i.e., by someone 
>> who
>> hadn't accepted the new CTs
>> at the time of submission) .....   to stay in the database", do you mean 
>> it
>> is OK for someone who in the past has made edits based on Nearmap 
>> imagery,
>> (and who has not yet agreed to the CT's because they had used Nearmap) , 
>> to
>> now agree to the CT's without being in breach of Nearmaps T & C's?
>>
>> I know this may seem like splitting hairs, but there is a difference
>> between "allowing edits to remain in the database" which is something OSM
>> sysadmins have control over, and "allowing users to agree to the CT's" 
>> which
>> is something individual OSM users have control over, and I'm just trying 
>> to
>> understand , as someone who has used Nearmap, but not agreed to the CT's,
>> where I stand.
>>
>> Pedantic is ok, this was written by lawyers!
>
> The second paragraph was drafted specifically to allow any NearMap-derived
> edits made up to the 17th of June to stay in the OSM database.  As I
> understand it, this statement allows a user to sign up to the new CTs
> without violating our licence in respect of those edits.
>
> Regards
> Ben
>
Ben

many thanks for the quick, and clear,  response.

Regards

David