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

[John Smith]

On 18 June 2011 00:13, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> No. Please re-read, and try to understand, my "Patents" example. You do not

Patents don't apply, and contract restrictions don't transfer without
explicit agreement from both parties to that contact, which is why I'm
asking if websites would have to bind users into a contract, at which
point there will be data users, like wikipedia that are no longer
compatible if they plan to mass distribute stuff under CC licenses.

> need to enter into a contract with anybody to be bound by a patent. Even if
> that patent is depicted in a CC-BY-SA picture. Do you understand that, or do
> I need to elaborate? If you do understand that, then does that or does that
> not prove that there may be restrictions to a content which live outside the
> scope of CC-BY-SA?

Patents don't apply here, please try not to confuse things further
than they already are, you are talking about the EUs database
directive, contract law and copyright law, no more and no less.

> Have you spent *any* time looking up the past "reverse engineering"
> discussion like I suggested? If no, then why are you wasting our time when
> you're not willing to spend one second to find the answers to your
> questions? If yes, then what points of that discussion did you not
> understand, exactly?

You can't slap a license restriction on an end user like you are
proposing without using a different copyright license, or hitting them
with a contract, and I'm being told that tiles are licensed as
cc-by-sa which don't provide restrictions of derivative works. For
this the minimum CC license would be CC-by-ND.