[OSM-talk] [Announce] OSMF license change vote has started

[Anthony]

On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 1:21 AM, Matt Amos <zerebubuth at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 6:13 AM, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
> > On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 12:47 AM, Matt Amos <zerebubuth at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> CC BY-SA imposes requirements *using* copyright law.
> >
> > No it doesn't.  Copyright law imposes requirements.  CC-BY-SA provides a
> > waiver to some of those requirements.
>
> a conditional waiver - the conditions of which aren't imposed by copyright
> law.
>

Correct.


> >> indeed. this is kind of the point: the US and some other jurisdictions
> >> don't yet have a database rights law, so to enforce similar
> >> restrictions to CC BY-SA it's necessary to use some other method.
> >
> > Okay, well, that's my point.  I don't want to have those restrictions
> > imposed.
>
> they're intended to be imposed.


You may intend them to be imposed.  I don't.


> CC BY-SA doesn't work,


In my opinion it does work.


> but the intention of the licensing is clear. did you look at the CC BY-SA
> license and say, "hey, these guys want me to share-alike, but i'm in a
> jurisdiction where that's unenforceable, so i'll just take the data,
> not attribute and give nothing back"?
>

I looked at the license and I said "Why are they bothering with this crap?
It's not like this stuff is copyrightable in the first place.  Well, I guess
that this stuff is protected by some laws in some jurisdictions, so CC-BY-SA
is useful for waiving those rights in those jurisdictions.  For me, in a
state with sane laws, I don't have to worry about it.  What the heck, sure,
I'll license my data under CC-BY-SA.  Can't hurt."

I'll attribute, maybe, if it's not too hard.  I'll "give back", usually,
because it's easier than merging.  But I know I don't have to do these
things.

> I live in the United States.  I can do whatever the heck I want with the
> OSM
> > database.  Now you want me to agree to a contract limiting those rights.
> So
> > I'll ask again:  What's in it for me?
>
>
> nothing directly. but maybe you'd like to respect the intentions of
> those other contributors who agreed to a license that they thought
> would ensure that you can't do whatever the heck you want without
> attributing and sharing-alike?
>

Most likely I will.  But that doesn't mean I'm going to contractually bind
myself to doing so.  Especially if you're not going to pay for me to have a
lawyer read over that contract.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20091206/22552259/attachment.html>