[OSM-legal-talk] Some questions about using ODbL "Produced Work" maps in Wikipedia

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 21.07.2012 20:44, Adrian Frith wrote:
> Does this mean that, in my scenario, the only recipient to whom I have
> an obligation under ODbL sec. 4.6 is the Wikimedia Foundation?
> Everyone else who receives it receives it from WMF under CC-BY-SA and
> they have no claim on me?

This is an interesting question. I don't think you are right though; 
CC-BY-SA does not work by sublicensing. For someone who downloads your 
image from Wikipedia, the licensor is *not* Wikipedia, but still you.

This is governed by CC-BY-SA 2.0 par. 8a: "Each time You distribute or 
publicly digitally perform the Work or a Collective Work, the Licensor 
offers to the recipient a license to the Work on the same terms and 
conditions as the license granted to You under this License."

This means that if someone downloads your map from Wikipedia, in that 
moment *you* offer a license on the map to whoever downloads it; and 
Wikipedia is not part of that chain. So I *think* that license-wise, you 
have at that very moment licensed the Produced Work to the downloader 
(even if he hasn't downloaded from you), and he can request the ODbL 
sources from you.

If it were any different, you could team up with a co-publisher, publish 
your ODbL Produced Works to him and he forwards them to the world 
without you ever having to release anything. It would be a loophole that 
demands quick fixing ;)

Bye
Frederik

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