[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Contact And Remap Campaign

[andrzej zaborowski]

On 13 February 2012 12:53, Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:
> While I've expressed my displeasure with every revision of the CTs after 1.0
> for exactly your reasoning, I don't believe that the situation is quite as
> bad as you paint it. Come April the 1st the only extra "string attached" to
> data that is in the database should be attribution via the Website. Which
> implies that further data removal would only be necessary if we wanted to
> use a distribution license that didn't require any attribution at all, which
> is extremely unlikely (not the least because of the necessary data removal).
>
> Simon
>
> PS:    Andrzej will naturally point to the Polish situation, and I will
> point back saying: please supply a list of the relevant changesets of
> CC-by-2.0 data that were erroneously declared good (by way of excepting the
> CTs).

(I assume you mean CC-By-SA)

Simon, I would like to know what your interpretation of the current
Contributor Terms version is, I know what LWG's interpretation is from
their meeting minutes and it must be different from your
interpretation.  If by "declared good" you mean declared
ODbL-compatible then there's nothing special in Poland because nothing
has been declared good.  The acceptance of CT, according to LWG (and
to my reading of CT 1.2.4) is not such a declaration, it is orthogonal
to ODbL compatibility.  There's no basis for anyone to assume such a
thing, worldwide not only in Poland.

Secondly as you know CC-By-SA licensed data has been contributed by
CT-accepters outside of Poland too and I wouldn't be surprised if it's
being contributed today taking advantage of the "current license"
still being the CC one.  It is not only through (what we call)
imports.

Even if it were through imports only, then I can't make out what you
mean by "erroneously".  First of all the imports in Poland have been
documented in the imports catalogue on the wiki, so this was in
keeping with the community guidelines as well as the CT.  This is not
true of the hundreds of local, smaller imports that are happening
every day (see the imported streets in Lima, or see the Santa Rosa
town in the El Oro canton of Ecuador and the nearby towns, and tell me
what their original license was) especially in non-English-speaking
countries, where the Contributor Terms is the only "binding" document.
 The community guidelines are really guidelines of the part of the
community contributing to the talk@ list and the English wiki, a tip
of an iceberg.

(for the record, I did indicate to the LWG how to produce a list of
the changesets in Poland containing imported CC-By-SA data)

Cheers