[Talk-GB] OS have switched to Open Government License today...

David Groom reviews at pacific-rim.net
Fri Jan 7 13:57:29 GMT 2011



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Mann" <richard.mann.westoxford at gmail.com>
To: "Talk-GB at openstreetmap.org" <talk-gb at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 1:13 PM
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OS have switched to Open Government License today...


>
> But (unless I've missed something) that doesn't deal with the issue
> that the CTs reserve the right to switch the data to (amongst other
> things) a non-attribution licence at a future date.

Indeed, and as many will be aware its something I have raised concerns 
about.  It is touched upon by Mike Collinson here 
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2011-January/005716.html

Perhaps the answer is that if at some time in the future a new licence was 
proposed, and OSMF is aware that there is data in the DB which would be 
incompatible with that proposed future licence, and they are unable to 
identify and remove that data, then they would have to accept that they 
would be prevented from switching to that licence.

David


>
> Richard
>
> On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 2:39 PM, Peter Miller <peter.miller at itoworld.com> 
> wrote:
>> The OS have today switched to the Open Government License which means 
>> that
>> any remaining doubts of the compatibility of OS Open data with ODBL have
>> been resolved as far as I can see.
>>
>> Details in the email below.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> From: Tom Hughes <tom at compton.nu>
>> Date: 6 January 2011 10:29
>> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CTs and the 1 April deadline
>> To: "Licensing and other legal discussions." 
>> <legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
>> Cc: Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net>
>>
>>
>> On 04/01/11 15:49, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>>
>>> As it happens OS is planning to move to the Open Government Licence, and
>>> this has an explicit compatibility clause with any ODC attribution
>>> licence.
>>> (It also has sane guidance on attribution, e.g. "If it is not practical 
>>> to
>>> cite all sources and attributions in your product prominently, it is 
>>> good
>>> practice to maintain a record or list of sources and attributions in
>>> another
>>> file. This should be easily accessible or retrievable.")
>>
>> This switch has just been announced:
>>
>> http://blog.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/2011/01/changes-to-the-os-opendata-licence/
>>
>> Tom
>>
>> --
>> Tom Hughes (tom at compton.nu)
>> http://compton.nu/







More information about the Talk-GB mailing list