[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?

80n
-------------- 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