[OSM-legal-talk] The detrimental effects of database
frederik at remote.org
Wed Nov 23 18:09:08 GMT 2011
On 11/23/2011 06:22 PM, 80n wrote:
> 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.
I part agree, part disagree with that.
I don't think that our bar should be "no data that could, just possibly,
be claimed to infringe...". That would be too high; even today, under
CC-BY-SA, we have a lot of data where people have claimed infringement
and the claims have turned out to be insubstantial.
I think the bar must be "no data that could *reasonably* be claimed to
But I think that the specific example under discussion here actually
falls short of even this lowered bar. It is quite possible for me to
grab a whole Way in JOSM and move it one metre to the left (which makes
me the last editor of, potentially, hundreds of untagged nodes). I don't
think that this action would nullify the rights of the original
contributor of the way, and therefore if the original contributor does
not agree to the license change, we should remove this data.
> 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
... when we had a fraction of the community we have now, less accurate
aerial imagery and no secondary data sources to compare against.
Re-mapping not only removes the license baggage, it also has the
potential to improve quality. I agree - let's rather invest a little
more work now and have a solid foundation for the future, than build on
sand just to get it done quicker.
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
More information about the legal-talk