[OSM-talk] OSMF: The people you are going to hand over your OSM data ...

[80n]

On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 4:02 AM, Matt Amos <zerebubuth at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 3:25 AM, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 5, 2009 at 11:41 PM, SteveC <steve at asklater.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Dec 5, 2009, at 4:25 PM, Ulf Lamping wrote:
> >> > Remember: Steve is the head of the OSMF, so this is the OSMF
> Chairman's
> >> > position about other peoples opinions when they don't share his own
> >> > opinion.
> >>
> >> I'm not allowed to have opinions?
> >>
> >> > Is this the organization you want to hand over the license of your OSM
> >> > data?
> >>
> >> The OSMF wont own the data and you know it.
> >>
> > The Contributor Terms contains the following clause:  "You hereby grant
> to
> > OSMF and any party that receives Your Contents a worldwide, royalty-free,
> > non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable license to do any act that is
> > restricted by copyright over anything within the Contents, whether in the
> > original medium or any other."
> >
> > That's pretty much as close as you can get to owning a piece of data.
>
> out of interest, would you prefer that it were worded like CC BY-SA?
>
> "[you] hereby grant[s] [OSMF] a worldwide, royalty-free,
> non-exclusive, perpetual (for the duration of the applicable
> copyright) license to exercise the rights in the Work as stated below:
> [list of rights covered by the Berne convention.] The above rights may
> be exercised in all media and formats whether now known or hereafter
> devised. The above rights include the right to make such modifications
> as are technically necessary to exercise the rights in other media and
> formats."
>
> as far as i can see the contributor terms definition says the same
> thing, except ...


...except the context is different.  With CC BY-SA you are giving everyone
the same rights.  With the Contributor Terms the only one to have those
rights is the OSMF.




> it's more concise. we strived for readability and
> brevity in the contributor terms, given that it will be read by so
> many people. do you think it would have been better to go for the
> longer version as CC BY-SA does?
>
> just as CC BY-SA contains limitations on the exercise of those rights
> (BY and SA), so does the contributor terms - initially only a release
> under CC BY-SA and ODbL, subject to a vote of the OSMF membership and
> "active contributors" if the need arises to change that to a different
> "free and open" license.
>
> cheers,
>
> matt
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20091206/76a7670c/attachment.html>