[talk-au] ODBL yet again, but from a pragmatic approach...

80n 80n80n at gmail.com
Thu Jul 29 08:58:36 BST 2010

On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 6:12 AM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com>wrote:

> On 29 July 2010 13:57, Andrew Harvey <andrew.harvey4 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > What should I do? Can I "unagree" to the CTs?
> I doubt you can "unagree", although you won't get an answer even if
> you asked, the whole process is very opaque and poorly communicated.
> There has been talk about exceptions for large data providers, but
> there is no disclosure of what constitutes a large data provider or
> how to get an exception.
> In short I have no idea what you should do, *if* we were to stick to
> OSM's whiter than white approach to copyright, the data you derived
> should be removed from the database due to breach of Nearmap terms.
> I'm not advocating that data actually be removed from the database for
> this reason, however the current CTs put a lot of new users in a very
> awkward position, and this is bound to blow up in someone's face at
> some point.

If a new user, who has agreed to the contributor terms, makes a contribution
that this derived from work that is *only* licensed under CC-BY-SA do they
have the right to allow that contribution to be licensed under ODbL.  I
don't think they do.

All existing new users need to be very careful about modifying existing CC
only licensed work, which includes almost everything that is already in OSM,
don't they?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20100729/44d7581b/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Talk-au mailing list