[OSM-talk] The long tail - lowest common denominator

[Andy Robinson]

Your list principally covers the use of data contributed to, held in and
distributed by OSM. One other point that came up on #OSM IRC yesterday was
the need to ensure that OSM can utilise and respect the licence of other
available data that would enhance OSM. The TIGER import type data out there.
Chris Schmidt was interested in the MassGIS data which has its own licence.

So there is a need to consider how other pre-existing data might be included
within the terms of any OSM licence, albeit that there will clearly be a
limit to what is practicable or beneficial.

Cheers

Andy

Andy Robinson
Andy_J_Robinson at blueyonder.co.uk 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:talk-
>bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of Richard Fairhurst
>Sent: 07 July 2006 09:06
>To: talk at openstreetmap.org
>Cc: legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] The long tail - lowest common denominator
>
>If we're going to talk privacy policy and licences, I guess it might be
>an idea to establish what we all believe in - what we all believe OSM
>should be.
>
>Here's a brief list of "project aims and shared beliefs" as I see it,
>in an attempt to find a bottom line we can all sign up to. If we agree,
>we can go on to debate anything over and above this. Some of you may
>recognise the first few points...
>
>== Things we can all agree on ==
>
>1. The freedom for anyone to use OSM geodata for any purpose [=FSF
>"freedom 0"]
>2. The freedom for anyone to access OSM geodata "source" (e.g.
>planet.osm or a db dump, subject to any privacy concerns) [=FSF
>"freedom 1"]
>3. The freedom to redistribute copies of OSM geodata [=FSF "freedom 2"]
>4. The freedom to add your own material to OSM geodata, and if you
>like, to release this to the public [=FSF "freedom 3"]
>
>== Things we can maybe agree on? ==
>
>5. You can charge money for products using OSM geodata as long as the
>licence terms are satisfied. [=not CC-NC]
>6. You can superimpose a "layer" or "mashup" on top of OSM geodata with
>no restrictions on the licence of the other layer/mashup data. [=Imi's
>"I created a layer..." in the Legal FAQ]
>7. OSM/OSMF exists to provide and promote geodata licensed according to
>(...the terms we settle on). It doesn't exist to promote that ideology
>in a wider context. [By which I mean: even if we settle on a CC
>licence, we're not here to advocate CC-ness in general. Same goes if we
>settle on PD or a GNU licence or something with ninjas in it.]
>8. OSM's licence should, in general, aim to be more liberal/permissive
>than the copyright laws of the countries in which it operates.
>9. The licence should be as unambiguous as possible, to avoid lawyer
>troubles.
>
>Is this about right or have I missed the point? Yell if you have
>problems with any of the above.
>
>(As yet I don't think we're looking for "yes but"s... additional
>requirements can come later.)
>
>I've expressly avoided using the word "free" because it _may_ mean
>different things to different people. I've written this with no thought
>as to whether the end result will be CC-By-SA, something GNUish, public
>domain, or an entirely new licence.
>
>(BTW, worth noting that not all our aims have to be achieved through a
>licence. Licences are great for forbidding things - "thou shalt not".
>But when we want to say "we shall", we could also consider using the
>aims of the OSM Foundation. Charitable aims are legally binding in the
>UK and I guess in some other countries.)
>
>cheers
>Richard
>
>P.S. NickB - seconded, Imi - good to have you back, Steve - congrats
>for being brave enough to answer all this openly and honestly. Dammit,
>we're all so _nice_. ;)
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>talk mailing list
>talk at openstreetmap.org
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/talk