[OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] [Osmf-talk] OSM : It's a shame !!!
balrogg at gmail.com
Mon May 28 22:22:31 BST 2012
On 28 May 2012 23:03, Mike Dupont <jamesmikedupont at googlemail.com> wrote:
> moving the discussion to legal
> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 8:02 PM, andrzej zaborowski <balrogg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Copying and pasting is not a copyright infringement. The Contributor
>> Terms don't require that the data inserted into the database be
>> compatible with ODbL -- only the current licensing terms, which still
>> means CC-By-SA. Otherwise many many normal edits would also
>> constitute an infringement.
> CC-BY-SA requires attribution.
> '' You must keep intact all copyright notices for the Work and give
> the Original Author credit reasonable to the medium or means You are
> utilizing by conveying the name (or pseudonym if applicable) of the
> Original Author if supplied; the title of the Work if supplied;''
> ""This License and the rights granted hereunder will terminate
> automatically upon any breach by You of the terms of this License""
> so the new uploader lost his rights to copy it if he did not attribute it.
> So it is an infringement, unless you take the view that this data is
> not copyrightable at all and the cc-by-sa license does not protect
Mike, I wouldn't say the usernames appearing in the object history on
www.osm.org/browse/... are used to fulfill the attribution
requirement. First of all it'd break for many different basic
operations done in the editors such as splitting and merging ways,
copying tags, placing POIs with spatial reference to nearby streets.
I kind of agree with Frederik Ramm's statement that (from memory)
"anything that relies on object id persistence is broken" and so is
part of the current redaction algorithm.
I think a reasonable expectation for a contributor to have is that
they'll be attributed as shown in the osm.org/copyright page, i.e.
collectively as OpenStreetMap contributors.
More information about the legal-talk