[OSM-talk] Revert requests in general
Richard Fairhurst
richard at systemeD.net
Wed Aug 4 08:53:19 BST 2010
Ben Last wrote:
> I'm not sure I agree. We don't want to put barriers in the way of an
> average user (and I use that term to explicitly distinguish between
> the average map site user and a mapping enthusiast) making simple
> corrections such as adding address information or naming un-named
> streets. In particular, we don't want to bounce them to the OSM site
> to register (and face yet another set of terms and conditions), when
> they're already registered on our site.
I see your pain, but ease of getting map data into OSM doesn't trump
concerns of legality and ownership of data. Otherwise I'd have
introduced a Google aerial background into Potlatch like a shot. ;)
As Frederik says, Mapzen - designed, like your editor, to lower the
barrier to entry - is an instructive example. The OAuth support was
introduced exactly so that other sites could provide OSM editors,
whether Mapzen, the mooted OpenCycleMap editor, or whatever.
In particular ODbL+CT will require a contractual relationship (i.e. the
contributor terms) between OSMF and the user. If you are not exposing
the user to the sign-up process, they are not agreeing to this contract.
Your lawyers can of course find a way which satisfies them (and you)
that there is sufficient agreement between your user terms and
CC-BY-SA/ODbl+CT, but for any novel way of getting data into OSM, the
onus is on the importer to satisfy _OSM_, not just themselves. That's
the conversation we need to have here, and potentially also that you
need to have with OSMF. (I would suggest that, as a courtesy, you drop
OSMF a line and ask them to consider the matter.)
My contention is that the only fair way to do it without imposing any
risk on OSM is to require an explicit PD/CC0-type waiver from your
users. For trivial edits made by a simple editor, this is probably good
practice as they're unlikely to be substantial anyway.
As per previously cited blog post (http://www.systemeD.net/blog/?p=100)
I'm of the opinion that tracing from aerial imagery does not carry
through any IP from the photography. It's up to the provider of the
imagery whether they want to impose contractual restrictions. So the
ball's in your court, really. :)
> I hope by now that many OSMers will appreciate that we continue
> to do a lot of support OSM, and that we do take the integrity and
> reliability of the data very seriously.
Absolutely.
cheers
Richard
More information about the talk
mailing list