On 21 December 2011 12:43, Ed Avis <e...@waniasset.com> wrote: > andrzej zaborowski <balrogg@...> writes: >>>- is a mapper declaration of odbl=clean interesting and helpful in >>>reconciling the data base? >> >>Definitely, and I think odbl=no would also be useful to mark objects >>that are known to come from ODbL-incompatible sources but whose >>contributors accepted Contributor Terms 1.2.4, of which there is a >>significant number. > > Hold on - is OSMF going to delete contributions even from some people who > *did* > accept the new contributor terms? (I'm not saying it should or it should not, > but this needs to be made clear.)
This has been made clear many times: whether to delete an object or not needs to be decided looking at some part of its edits history, so even if your contribution is "clean", the object may be tainted. The case I'm thinking about though is where a mapper accepted CT but had previously (or later) contributed data incompatible with ODbL. Which is something that seems to be allowed by CT, as long as 1. you grant OSMF the rights that you have in the data, 2. what you uploaded was compatible with current licensing. Cheers _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
