[OSM-legal-talk] What licences (other than ODbL) are compatible with OSM after 1st April

Paul Norman penorman at mac.com
Fri Mar 23 01:34:20 GMT 2012

If the import source is something other than PD this point should be
discussed in the required messages to the imports@ mailing list before
importing. That way the community can decide if they want it with the
licensing issues.


From: Ian Sergeant [mailto:inas66+osm at gmail.com] 
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2012 6:12 PM
To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] What licences (other than ODbL) are compatible
with OSM after 1st April


On 23 March 2012 10:46, Mayeul Kauffmann <mayeul.kauffmann at free.fr> wrote:

I'm a bit confused here: Does the data provider still need to create an
account and approve the contributor terms?? And they should add the data

This would be ideal.  Then we know they have agreed the contributor terms
for the data, and no further negotiation is required. 

If not, and you are doing the import, then you need to ensure that your
contribution to OSM is in line with the contributor terms you have agreed.
This is not merely that the data can be released under the ODbL.  The
contributor terms are much wider in effect than that, and grant certain
rights to the OSMF and the right to relicence (under a free and open
licence) to a majority of active members of the community.

Going by the imports page, we are currently retaining imports from people
who have agreed for their data to be released under the "openstreetmap
licence", and "any free and open licence".

The hurdle to import is higher, but our flexibility with the resulting data
is greater.

We certainly don't want to be in a position of having to remove data should
we ever relicence again.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20120322/cb1a4b92/attachment.html>

More information about the legal-talk mailing list