[Osmf-talk] [OSM-talk] ODBL vote (was Re: Enough is enough: disinfecting OSM from poisonous people)

Sam Vekemans acrosscanadatrails at gmail.com
Thu Aug 12 11:06:15 UTC 2010


Thread closed:

On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 3:50 AM, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net> wrote:
> [Apologies for continuing cross-post, please follow-up to OSM legal-talk.]
>
> Sam Vekemans wrote:
>
>> So my question is weather or not, at a later date,  I
>> can change my choice (based on new information which would want me to
>> change my mind).?
>
> As a general point, if you declare that something is "public domain" (say,
> by a CC0 declaration), you can't reverse it _for_that_particular_work_. You
> have already granted rights for people to distribute it without infringing.
>
> You can, of course, declare that your future works will be licensed
> differently.
>
> In the specific case of the OSM database, if you wanted to start doing this,
> you would probably need to establish a per-object licensing flag. This would
> require significant code changes and I assume you're not volunteering to do
> that.
>
> I would suggest therefore that the best way to do that is for you to
> maintain two accounts, one PD and one not. Certainly this is what I intend
> to do, so that I can use the latter for any future substantial mapping from
> attribution-required sources (e.g. OS OpenData). That said, substantial
> mapping if you haven't been there is bad anyway. ;)
>
> cheers
> Richard (official OSM PITAFL)
>
>

Thanks, I have 2 accounts and can easily make the preference clear in
my user profile description.

So this solves the issue,

Thanks,
Sam




More information about the osmf-talk mailing list