[OSM-talk] Voluntary re-licensing begins

80n 80n80n at gmail.com
Fri Aug 13 13:53:17 BST 2010


On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 10:37 AM, David Groom <reviews at pacific-rim.net>wrote:

>  80n
>
> It was not my intention to imply CC-BY-SA is compatible with ODbL.  I did
> not really want to get into a discussion about ODbL, but to concentrate
> solely on the CT's.
>
> My intention was simply to draw attention to the fact that agreeing to the
> CT terms was not as simple as might have been suggested by the text on the
> sign up page which appeared yesterday, with no warning that there might be
> issue if you had used some of the more common sources of data currently
> employed by OSM mappers.
>

David, I had no doubt that you were clear about this.  But I didn't want
other casual readers left with the impression that they could agree to
either the CTs or the ODbL if they had been contributing CC-BY-SA content.

As you say, the CT does not give the user any guidance or warning on this
matter.  Others have argued at length that the relicensing is biased towards
passive acceptance, so we shouldn't go over that again, but this sloppiness
will undermine the provenance of the OSM content - something we've all
worked very hard to guarantee, up till now.

80n






>
> David
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* 80n <80n80n at gmail.com>
> *To:* David Groom <reviews at pacific-rim.net>
> *Cc:* Cartinus <cartinus at xs4all.nl> ; talk at openstreetmap.org
> *Sent:* Friday, August 13, 2010 9:11 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk] Voluntary re-licensing begins
>
> On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:47 PM, David Groom <reviews at pacific-rim.net>wrote:
>
>> b) Ignoring the Yahoo data, but taking any data that may have had a PD or
>> CC-BY-SA clause that has be used in import, since these are general
>> permissions given and they do not explicitly mention granting rights to use
>> in OSM, I cant possible agree that I have EXPLICIT permission to use them. I
>> have permission by virtue of they are PD or CC-BY-SA, but not EXPLICIT
>> permission to do so.
>>
>
> David, I don't think that CC-BY-SA is compatible with ODbL, nor with the
> Contributor Terms.  If you have added content that is licensed under
> CC-BY-SA you cannot agree to the Contrbutor Terms.
>
> I'm sure you know that but your statement above suggests that CC-BY-SA is
> compatible with OBdL and CT.  It is not.
>
> 80n
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100813/f081c587/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list