[OSM-legal-talk] Someone ought to do something ... dealing with violations of OSM's geodata license

Rob Myers rob at robmyers.org
Mon Mar 21 19:36:13 GMT 2011


On 03/21/2011 07:07 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:
> Francis wrote:
>
>  >I certainly agree that taking legal action should be low on any list.
>
>  >It can be expensive, risky and time consuming.
>
> *+1 *

It should be the nuclear option. It should, however, be on the list.

> Should we want to be attributed ?

Yes. It's part of the licence.

> To satisfy pedantic ego inside us ?

No. People do argue for this sometimes on the basis of ego, but that is 
not the only reason for doing so and it is not the practical effect.

For the ODbL, attribution serves an important *practical* purpose. It 
directs users of produced works to the source database.

That's not ego, that's supporting the freedom of individuals

> Can we never give something to the world without asking back ???

Gift economies presuppose strongly enforcible social norms in exchange 
that do not exist in non-tribal societies.

> None of us can enforce any license to any serious player on the market
> trying to steal “our” data. Commercial maps are a business of millions
> of dollars. Any legal action is wasting (our) lots money, and even worse,
> will not lead to any compensations, as we don't make money with our data (so
> we can’t lose any either –but for the enforcement-)

The point is not to make money but to protect the freedom of individuals 
who use maps.

Compliance is the objective, not profit.

The effect of compliance is to protect the freedom of users that would 
be removed by non-compliance.

> I mean, what will be the net result of such an enforcement,

People will retain access to the data they need to retain their freedom 
to work with maps and other uses of geodata.

> as we do
> not benefit nor loose from the mere fact that our license/attribution
> is being respected or not.

You do, and more to the point the users do.

> Enforcing licenses/attributions is a sure way to lose what we do have in
> plenty:
>
> -the open and free image

And not enforcing is a way of losing *the reality*.

> -sympathy among literally hundreds of thousands

[citation needed]

> -information about our world to give to its citizen in wealth and in
> disaster

Attribution is a way of letting people know that they have access to 
this data!

> The only way to go is making OSM free as in free !

OSM is free as in free. It's an equitable project to promote and protect 
liberty, not a costly gift.

> Free OSM effectively stops the big players of making money with geodata
> and that is the only way we can actually “enforce” that what we actually
> promise on our (wiki)home page:

A gift OSM would precisely enable big players to make money from the 
project without being able to enforce OSM's promise.

- Rob.



More information about the legal-talk mailing list