Frederik Ramm schrieb:
Heiko Jacobs wrote:
A real ODBL-OSM can only be build with "home copies" of the data
of the contributors who said yes. They cannot copy their own edits
from CC-OSM, because this also will be a condensation of CC-OSM ...
I don't think so. Copyright is not based on the physical path that data
has traveled.
But on his travel using the "physical path OSM" data changes ...
The original mapper makes his GPS track suitable to existing data in OSM
and other mappers will modify this data
For example, there's dual-licensed software where you can
either use it under GPL or pay for a commercial license. You don't have
to re-download the software when you switch from GPL to commercial
but this software is dual licenced frmm beginning, not relicenced,
and it's GPL not CC, that may be a difference, too
Richard Fairhurst schrieb:
> Heiko Jacobs wrote:
>> A real ODBL-OSM can only be build with "home copies" of the
>> data of the contributors who said yes. They cannot copy their
>> own edits from CC-OSM, because this also will be a
>> condensation of CC-OSM ...
>
> So if they violate the licence, they'll be sued by the copyright holder,
> right?
>
> I look forward to Richard Fairhurst suing Richard Fairhurst for violating
> the license on Richard Fairhurst's data.
If you read my last mails you may know that I don't like any loss of data
with the only reason of relicencing OSM ...
Up to now the only possibility of voting to fail the licence change including
any loss of data is to say, that my own data has not to be relicensed,
hoping that the critical mass is not reached ...
That's not very satisfiable for me and the community, if the change does not
fail, because I will lose my login and all my data are lost ...
You say, that Richard may suing Richard ...
Because of this I just got a new idea:
I say yes for changing licence and after relicencing I am suing OSMF to
put the new data under CC again because it is still under CC following
the contents of CC...
Or any other user of "ODBL"-OSM may use the data still under old CC licence
because it is really still under CC licence and no one can sue them with
success because of they are right ...
Frederik said in one mail (I don't know if also in english, I just remember
his german mail) that "we" promised that the mappers work is protected by CC,
but we remark, that this don't work, so we need a better licence.
But because we made a promise, we cannot find an easy solution to transfer
ALL data to ODBL and must skip some data of unreachable and declining mappers.
Now we will make a new promise, that the mappers data is now really protected
under ODBL, but again this may doesn't work ...
We should find a way to protect data without making unclear promises ...
... and without any loss of data ...
Mueck
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
