the OSM CTs, there is no copyright assignment per
se, there is only a sub-license agreement. You don't *give away* your
copyright, but you allow the OSMF to to *use* your copyrighted material
and sub-license it.
Robert Kaiser
___
legal-talk mailing
there was no agreement I needed to OK that said that in
detail. (Of course, the OSMF is the legal representative of the project,
as the project has no legal standing by itself at all.)
Robert Kaiser
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk
Olaf Schmidt-Wischhöfer schrieb:
[Robert Kaiser, 11.08.2011, 21:17]:
Most of us always agreed that our data is the data of the OSM project as
soon as we contributed it, and that the project will always be able to use
it. Some disagree apparently and make the life of the project much harder
, as most contributors
want an attribution to the project at least - and that's what's not
guaranteed with current CC-BY-SA due to not applying for databases
appropriately in some jurisdictions.
Robert Kaiser
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk
of the licence or issue clarifications about what it means, because the
OSMF is not the copyright holder.)
Well, IIRC that's exactly one of the points of the CTs, granting the
OSMF the right to allow exemptions in some cases.
Robert Kaiser
___
legal-talk
.
If all your contributions can be considered CC0/PD, then you grant all
right to everybody who wants to use the data, so your statements are
definitely in conflict with themselves. Nobody in our friendly OSM
community can help your resolve the problem of not agreeing with
yourself. ;-)
Robert Kaiser
to a request to vote. IMHO, if you log
into your user account (e.g. because you got a message about a vote),
that's already contribution. But I wonder if the CTs define that
clearly anywhere (sorry, no time to find and read them right now).
Robert Kaiser
electronic means.
I vote for other electronic means, then. ;-)
Robert Kaiser
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
definition of how 67% is defined, though.
If 67% is not clear in legalese, then legalese is stupid, IMHO. Let's
abolish all legal rules and make contributing fun instead, then.
Robert Kaiser
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Rob Myers schrieb:
Please name the jurisdictions you have in mind and provide references to
the applicable case law in those jurisdictions. Please also provide
sources demonstrating that data is PD in those jurisdictions.
WHAT about IANAL in my message don't you understand?
Robert Kaiser
Ed Avis schrieb:
Well, 67% of 'active contributors' however defined.
Wait. Stop for a moment here. Doesn't the CT have a very clear
definition of how active contributors are defined?
Robert Kaiser
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk
with
geographical unfairness somehow feels wrong to me. ;-)
Robert Kaiser
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Anthony schrieb:
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Robert Kaiserka...@kairo.at wrote:
Anthony schrieb:
One alternative is status quo.
Good idea. We'll just have to make sure anyone using our data is located in
some jurisdiction where this is equivalent to PD (from all I've heard, there
are
Anthony schrieb:
One alternative is status quo.
Good idea. We'll just have to make sure anyone using our data is located
in some jurisdiction where this is equivalent to PD (from all I've
heard, there are quite a few). :P
Robert Kaiser
way if by not contributing any more data under the other license, but
you have already given away any data before that point, you don't own it
any more, and you shouldn't be able to prohibit the project from using
it any more.
Robert Kaiser
that.
IANAL, and all information is from hearsay, but that's how I take all that.
Robert Kaiser
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
, you can't use a
documentation license for creative works, a code license for
documentation or a creative license for a mostly factual database - at
least not reasonably. And that's what all our relicensing is about in
the end.
Robert Kaiser
the organization that
operates all of the software and hardware of the project (the OSMF in
our case) should not have contributed any data to the project as a whole
in the first place.
Robert Kaiser
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
to OSM is
probably not even protectable in any way, if what I heard is correct.
Robert Kaiser
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
- as a good
collaboration between volunteers, business people and those volunteers
who can convert it into making a living out of it. :)
Robert Kaiser
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo
20 matches
Mail list logo
