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

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Wed Nov 23 18:09:08 GMT 2011


Hi,

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 
infringe...".

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.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"



More information about the legal-talk mailing list