[OSM-legal-talk] Proposed "Metadata"-Guideline

[Luis Villa]

On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 1:58 PM Tom Lee <tlee at mapbox.com> wrote:

> Martin,
>
>
> Is there a problem with the current license? Is it not clear from a legal
> point of view, how it should be interpreted?
>
>
> Correct--it's currently unclear how the license applies to many important
> use cases. Partly this is because it's untested: OSM is the only important
> user of ODbL [...]
>

Also, unlike copyright, the ODbL is based on legal terms and concepts that
are largely untested and undefined. As I've explained on this list
before[1], some very basic terms like "substantial" are not well-defined in
the statute or caselaw. In some cases, that vagueness may be helpful for
OSM; in other cases, not so much.

Luis

[1]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2014-April/007809.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20150923/f39a61fc/attachment.html>