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

David Groom reviews at pacific-rim.net
Tue Apr 19 14:14:05 BST 2011



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "TimSC" <mapping at sheerman-chase.org.uk>
To: <talk-gb at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Contributor Terms vs OS OpenData Licence


>
> On 19/04/11 11:45, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 04/19/11 12:32, TimSC wrote:
>>> I still think that the CTs ask
>>> for rights to be granted that are broader than are granted by the
>>> Opendata license. This point is disputed by Richard and others. Here are
>>> the most prolific Opendata users (in terms of version 1 objects) that
>>> have accepted the CTs, along with their user IDs:
>>
>> Does the explicit naming of these people actually contribute anything to 
>> solving the problem?
> Determining the scope of the problem is perhaps the first step to solving 
> it. And we might want to find out why these users felt the need

In defence of those users, I suspect they did not feel "the need to 
(possibly) violate OS OpenData's license",  i.e I suspect they did not make 
a conscious decision to possibly violate the licence;

I suspect that either:

(a) they were unaware there might be a problem, because when you are asked 
to agree to sign the CT's there really is no warning to those who have not 
followed the licensing debate that some existing sources of data may not be 
compatible with the CT's ;

or (b)  they have been persuaded by those on this (and the legal list) who 
have argued that OS OpenData is compatible with the CT's .

Ultimately, however, those users motives are not the most relevant issue. 
What is more relevant are the as yet unanswered questions:

(i) is OS OpenData compatible with the CT's; and

(ii) what will happen to the contributions of users who have breached the 
CT's

David

> to (possibly) violate OS Opendata's license. User education might be 
> something we can work on?
>
> However, does your question go towards solving the problem? Ad hominem tu 
> quoque!
>
> TimSC
>
>







More information about the Talk-GB mailing list