[OSM-legal-talk] The detrimental effects of database

80n 80n80n at gmail.com
Wed Nov 23 17:22:08 GMT 2011

On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com
> wrote:

> 2011/11/23 Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 11/23/11 15:16, FK270673 at fantasymail.de wrote:
> >>
> >> Currently, the LWG intends to delete all nodes ever created by
> >> decliners or non-responders.
> >
> > That is correct as far as I know.
> Would it legally be possible to keep those nodes that don't have tags
> on them, and whose position was changed in the meantime? In these
> cases isn't it safe to assume that there is no information from the
> original (declining) mapper left?
> Martin,
I don't see how it could be in anyone's interest to taint the map by
leaving in nodes that could, just possibly, be claimed to infringe
someone's rights.

The whole point of OSM is to produce a map that is usable under a clear and
legally certain license.  If it contains a lot of tainted data then that
principle is violated and the usefulness reduced.

It's not like it's going to be hard to recreate all this stuff.  It didn't
take long to create in the first place and remapping it is going to be a
lot of fun isn't it?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20111123/cc83cc8b/attachment.html>

More information about the legal-talk mailing list