[OSM-talk] How to start to remove non-CT compliant data..

[Russ Nelson]

Richard Fairhurst writes:
 > [follow-ups should be to legal-talk yadda yadda]
 > 
 > Russ Nelson wrote:
 > > What about the people who didn't agree to the CT, but whose data is 
 > > in the public domain?
 > 
 > See
 > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2011-August/006608.html
 > et seq.

I only see two people defending the idea, and a lot more questioning
it, that somehow a PD declaration is legally any less binding than
signing a contract. The first is a contract of adhesion: "Here's my
work; I renounce any copyright claims over it." The OSMF has the
choice of accepting that contract or rejecting it, just as it does the
contract formed by agreeing to the Contributor Terms. I don't
understand their choice of accepting the one contract but refusing the
other. Can somebody explain why one contract is superior to the other?
Because the CT looks more "legal"? But PD steps entirely outside the
realm of the law by stating that the author will not enforce
copyright. That looks like an even *better* contract to accept than
the CT.

In both cases, if the contract is breached, and the work infringing,
the OSMF's actions need to be exactly the same: remove the data from
the database, and make a reasonable attempt to ensure that it is not
further distributed by any recipients of the data. Since the OSMF has
entered into a contract with all contributors (PD or CT both), and the
contributors have agreed to this contract (PD or CT both), it has an
affirmative defense of innocent infringement.

Given that we do everything in an open and public manner, with board
meeting minutes, and community discussion being published, breaking
that defense would require proof that somebody on the OSMF board
agreed to accept somebody's contract with a wink and a nod. That would
be somewhere between impossible and expensive. If it's impossible, no
worries. If it's merely expensive, you have to look at the harm
done. Since there's no one editor (aside from importers of US Federal
Government works) who dominates the database, any claim of harm would
be difficult to prove. Since 1) the defense is strong, 2) the harm is
minimal, 3) cooperation is full, you should expect absolutely nobody
to sue the OSMF for infringement of works which are supposedly PD or
CT but not really.

-- 
--my blog is at    http://blog.russnelson.com
Crynwr supports open source software
521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315-600-8815
Potsdam, NY 13676-3213  |     Sheepdog