[Osmf-talk] Can we untick the Public domain checkbox from our initial choice done during OSM sign up?

[Rihards]

On 02.10.19 20:46, Kathleen Lu via osmf-talk wrote:
> Some questions, Christoph:
> Why would a mapper need to keep a separate record of their
> contributions, if the changeset metadata already keeps a record of which
> contributor made which edit?

I would guess - as neither a lawyer, nor judge - that Cristoph meant the
fact that OSMF only distributes dataset as a collection under ODbL.
Nobody can obtain it from any source as a dual-licenced dataset, or
obtain PD-marked contributions only.

Personally, I feel that this might be a storm in a teapot. PD
contributions alone most likely fall way under any usefulness
thresholds, which is why we haven't really heard of anybody asking about
_using_ data under such a licence - all concerns are about contributing
the data.

The biggest concern is the inability to stop contributing under PD, but
as it needs code changes, we are stuck on that practical roadblock.

> In any event, why would there be any "damage for the OSMF" in any
> circumstance, in the hypothetical case of a contributor who did not
> intend PD or did not have authority to contributo PD vs a data user?
> Are you a lawyer or judge?

I don't know whether this was intended so, but this statement felt
aggressive.
Perhaps you meant to ask whether the arguments are based on real-world
experience with similar cases?

> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 1:48 AM Christoph Hormann <chris_hormann at gmx.de
> <mailto:chris_hormann at gmx.de>> wrote:
> 
> 
>     I was originally going to stay out of this topic but since even after
>     Paul linked to the clarifying statement about the PD checkbox people
>     (including a LWG member) float the idea that this has practical meaning
>     for data users at the moment i feel the need to rectify that.  So a few
>     points:
> 
>     * The OSMF (AFAIK) currently does not distribute OSM data under licenses
>     other than the ODbL.  So the idea that any data user could in an area
>     with exclusively contributions from mappers with the PD checkbox
>     checked use the data without following the ODbL is wishful thinking on
>     side of data users.  In a court case this would be a preposterous
>     approach IMO.  They would be asked where they got the data from and
>     that would obviously be the OSMF (directly or indirectly) and that
>     would be the end of the argument.
> 
>     * As i see it the statement made by contributors registering with the PD
>     checkbox is neither a modification of the contributor terms nor a
>     statement towards anyone other than the OSMF.  In particular it is not
>     a statement of assurance that the mapper in question does not make any
>     use of data sources that are not PD as long as they are compatible with
>     the ODbL and permitted to be used for OSM under the current conditions
>     (which is what the mapper ensures under the CTs section 1a).
> 
>     * Even the statement that only lower damages could be claimed in a court
>     case in case it involves data contributed by mappers with the PD
>     checkbox checked seems doubtful.  If i work as a mapper for a
>     proprietary data company and sign a statement that i regard my
>     contributions to them to be under PD that does not in any way affect
>     the value of the data they might distribute to customers or the damages
>     they might claim in case of illegal use.  So unless a mapper has kept a
>     separate record of their contributions before uploading to the OSMF
>     servers and licensed that to the data user or when we are talking about
>     a PD data import i see no basis for the claim for there to be less
>     damage for the OSMF in a court case about use in violation of the ODbL.
> 
>     Long story short:  The PD checkbox is nothing more than a survey of all
>     newly registered contributors on how they view their future
>     contributions at the time they register.  That is a valuable thing to
>     do (and it might be woth maybe even thinking about a few other survey
>     questions to ask).  But it is nothing more.
> 
>     Note also that any claims for the possibility of using OSM data outside
>     the limitations of the ODbL (or any future different license adopted
>     using the process defined in the CTs) are also quite dangerous for any
>     negotiations with data providers (like aerial imagery etc.) about
>     permissions to use their data as a source for OSM.  If a data provider
>     might need to fear that permission for using their data in OSM might
>     lead to a mapper with the PD checkbox checked to use that data and then
>     a data user using the resulting data from within OSM under the
>     assumption that it is PD that endangers our chances to be able to use
>     such data sources.
> 
>     --
>     Christoph Hormann
>     http://www.imagico.de/
-- 
 Rihards