[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Mixing OSM and FOSM data

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Thu Jan 19 08:05:40 GMT 2012


On 01/19/12 03:07, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> Giżycko is one example, http://osm.org/go/0Pp7zn7~-- . As FK28..
> pointed out the major such cases are where mappers who imported
> ODbL-incompatible data accepted the Contributor Terms or CT-accepters
> import ODbL-incompatible data.  With version 1.2.4 requiring
> compatibility with only the current licensing terms,

Ah yes. This really is a problem, and it certainly was a very bad 
decision to make that change to the CT.

The issue has been discussed here


and elsewhere on this list.

We can only hope that most people "misunderstand" this whole thing and 
in their minds treat "agreeing to CT" and "agreeing to ODbL" the same. A 
strict reading of the current CT leads to the conclusion that while we 
can re-build the database to only contain data by CT agreers in April, 
we cannot release the result under ODbL because we do not even *know* 
which contributions are ODbL compatible and which aren't. I hope that 
LWG have some clever plan on how to deal with this. Otherwise they would 
not have made that change when they released 1.2.4, right ;-)?


More information about the legal-talk mailing list