[OSM-talk] Proposed Collective Database Guideline (was Meta-Data Guideline)

Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdreist at gmail.com
Thu Nov 5 13:12:52 UTC 2015


2015-11-05 13:36 GMT+01:00 Greg Troxel <gdt at ir.bbn.com>:

> I also don't understand precisely what the guideline means.  It seems
> the ODbL means what the courts say the text means, so the guideline is
> really a statement of how OSMF and the community view the edge cases,
> which could well give weight to a case.
>
>

Yes, I believe the guidelines are a way to influence the court's way of
reading the text by being more explicit how the "community" thinks the text
should be interpreted, and by having it published beforehand it is likely
also what the potential opponent in a court case would have had to assume
how the ODbL text would have to be understood or what was the intention of
it.


Simon: Why would a vote be necessary?
>


At the end of the day, these guidelines do influence the meaning of the
ODbL (at least that's the idea behind them). As the guidelines haven't been
available at the time the mappers gave the OSMF a mandate to distribute
their content under the ODbL, it seems reasonable they are asked now
whether they're OK with them. Expecting that every contributor is following
the talk or even legal-talk mailing list doesn't seem a reasonable way to
ask everybody. This even more as some people are pushing for a guideline
that would declare the results of geocoding as not ruled by the ODbL.

Cheers,
Martin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20151105/a05cc375/attachment.html>


More information about the talk mailing list