[OSM-talk] Fund Raising Ideas

[Dan Karran]

On 7/16/06, Christopher Schmidt <crschmidt at crschmidt.net> wrote:

> The licensor isn't OSM. The licensor is the person who created the data,
> and releases it under a CC-BY-SA license. There is no assignment of
> copyright to OSM, so it can not be the licensor, as I understand it.

Just checked in the license, and:
1c) "Licensor" means the individual or entity that offers the Work
under the terms of this License.
1d) "Original Author" means the individual or entity who created the Work.

To me (and IANAL) that implies that the licensor is the entity
(website in our case, until OSMF comes into existence) offering the
collective work as a whole whereas that work is made up of work by the
original authors.

> > (1) contributors would probably need to agree with this beforehand,
> > but for the weekend mapping projects the assumption is that an area
> > would be mapped by an individual, so this wouldn't be too difficult to
> > arrange
>
> Right. Assuming the contributor agrees to it, no problem at all.

Actually, there's nothing apparent to me in the licence that states
when the licensor needs to say what should be written as the credit
line, or that the contributor needs to agree to it. They've agreed
already, by sharing data under that licence, that the licensor will
tell them what they need to put on there.

> This is a relatively simple problem when you're working on the scale of
> 1-2-3 users, but becomes more difficult in, for example, downtown
> london, where you're dealing with hundreds.
>
> *shrug* Just mentioning -- I don't have any vested interest in ensuring
> that the licensing requirements are met, but I can see that some other
> organization might.

Ugh, didn't want to spend my Sunday afternoon reading licences... I'm
off to do some mapping instead  :)


Dan

-- 
Dan Karran
dan at karran.net
www.dankarran.com