[OSM-legal-talk] GADM license - any news?

Simone Aliprandi simone.aliprandi at gmail.com
Thu Aug 27 14:04:43 UTC 2015

Dear all,
thank you so much for all your suggestions and comments; everything
very helpful.
I try to "flog the dead horse" once again and then I'll shut up.

In addition to being a lawyer, I deal with research and dissemination,
so I like to deepen things even for a mere theoretical and scientific
interest (then beyond the direct implications that the OpenStreetMap
Project can have).
Responding to Tom,

> If it would be useful, I'd be happy to try to get in touch with the GADM
> people. Sending emails like that is a substantial part of my workday :-) I
> would just need clarity around what, specifically, we'd like to ask for
> this time.

Obviously, the best solution is that GADM chooses a "really open"
license, without the "non commercial" limitation, or better a public
domain waiver (but I know I'm asking too much). Alternatively, they
could at least decide to choose a license (a real one) instead of that
short disclaimer.
Licenses are written specifically to explain users how they can use
your work. For instance, it is no coincidence that the concept of
"non-commercial" always has an explicit definition within the
licenses; the common concept of "non commercial" is very different in
each jurisdiction.
Another important argument: if the copyright disclaimer is
unclear/vague, users feel obliged to ask permission every time. So it
is like the work is in a "full copyright" status.

> the factual nature of geodata and its effect on copyright is an interesting question

Yes it is. Anyway, it was not my idea to raise this question. This
depends on the comment found on the site Naturalearth: "the remainder
are facts readily available from multiple sources"

Thanks for you attention and comments.
Bye, Simone
Simone Aliprandi - http://www.aliprandi.org | http://www.array.eu

More information about the legal-talk mailing list