[Talk-GB] OSM Contributor Terms vs OS OpenData Licence

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Mon Apr 18 22:23:02 BST 2011


TimSC wrote:
> Except if someone creates a derivative database based on the main OSM 
> database, and strips out the source tags. Or creates a produced works, 
> which doesn't carry attribution to OSM but not OS. You also violate the 
> CTs.

I'm an outsider to all this OS business but if you guys in the UK should 
really have been uploading data that requires attributing OS in every 
downstream product then we have a problem which has nothing whatsover to 
do with the license change. I can see *no* OS attribution on any of the 
major tile providers, including our own. Of course you can always go to 
the source and see from the object history that OS was involved, but 
that is a technique that you seem to discount above.

So either this is all a big misunderstanding, or nobody who used OS data 
until now has cared sh*t for the license.

Now I could understand if someone has always maintained that OS data was 
incompatible with OSM and thus refused to use it.

What I cannot understand is if someone has happily used OS data until 
now, in the full knowledge that nobody would attribute OS downstream 
anywhere, but now says they cannot sign the CT because they codify 
exactly what has been happening. Reality check, anyone?


Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

More information about the Talk-GB mailing list