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

[Simon Poole]

I would have to respectfully disagree, as the problem is not only the
text of the checkbox itself, but the facts that the explanatory text
changed multiple times -and- for a significant amount of time checking
the checkbox was (accidentally) presented essentially as a mandatory
part of the signup process.

In summary, while well intended, the events conspired to make the
checkbox useless.

IMHO we have two, well three, ways forwards:

- remove the check box and all information associated with it,

- reset the field, agree on what checking it should mean legally (rather
tricky), and ask on login to re-decide what the value should be,

- continue to raise the question once per year, and getting me to
respond with the above.

Simon

On 01.10.2019 23:56, Kathleen Lu via osmf-talk wrote:
> I agree with Arlo. While the meaning of the checkbox is not 100%
> clear, I disagree that it "has no legal significance." While OSMF
> would not be in a position to conclusively declare such contributions
> as public domain, as OSMF cannot be certain to the extent of
> financially betting on the conclusion, that is not the same thing as
> it being meaningless. At the very least, someone who forked OSM and
> used only the edits that are PD would have a reason to believe such
> use was noninfringing. Even if that belief turned out to be incorrect
> for some number of contributors or contributions, it would lower the
> possible damages that could be claimed.
>
> Severin, I suggest if you are concerned that you simply make a new
> account and not check the box.
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 1, 2019 at 4:43 PM Arlo Barnes <arlo.barnes at gmail.com
> <mailto:arlo.barnes at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     I have the box checked, and while I understand that my edits
>     bundled with everyone else's are licensed under the ODbL (not a
>     dual-licensing arrangement), I expected then and still expect that
>     if someone wanted to reuse data originating solely from my edits
>     (or a combination of solely my edits and edits of others who had
>     that box checked at the time they made the edit), they could opt
>     to do so with absolutely as few restrictions as disclaimable by me.
>     To my eye, the difference between that expectation and 'legal
>     significance' is unclear, and would come down to the opinion of a
>     judge (as much copyright law ultimately does).
>     After all, what elements of a contract (and I think a license or
>     disclaiming of rights are merely contracts with a general public)
>     are not present in such a communication?
>     I wouldn't be upset if the Foundation wanted to simplify the
>     situation by removing the box, but I don't think assertions who
>     foundations are at best not obvious can act as justification for
>     such action; only community consensus that this would be a good
>     move can.
>     -Arlo
>     _______________________________________________
>     osmf-talk mailing list
>     osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org <mailto:osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org>
>     https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20191002/6941199c/attachment.html>