On 6 December 2010 20:44, David Murn <da...@incanberra.com.au> wrote: > On Mon, 2010-12-06 at 08:55 -0500, Serge Wroclawski wrote: >> This should really be taking place on the legal list but nonetheless: >> >> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Steve Bennett <stevag...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Hi, >> > So, this is awkward. According to my profile, I've "agreed to the >> > new Contributor Terms". I have no recollection of having done so, and >> > obviously I don't want to agree to them while they're incompatible >> > with Nearmap. >> >> If Nearmap is CC-BY-SA, they're compatible now. > > What about at changeover though? Im pretty sure Steve asked this > question in relation to data in the future, not the present.
It's incompatible even at present. > >> You're not "operating in a totally difference licensing mode", the >> work is licensed under CC-BY-SA until the switchover. > > What happens at switchover though? Does the work that he unwittingly > contributed (but he now wishes to revoke, having become aware of his > violation) get switched? > > If I was to put a tag into the database, which contained copyright > information, and I wasnt aware it was copyrighted, should I not have the > right to ask for the removal of that information? Does the OSMF need a > DMCA statement from anyone who has accidently contributed invalid data, > which they refuse to remove. I'm afraid the answer is you can delete the data yourself in that situation. So you actually have the right for the removal, but the easiest way to do that is to delete the data yourself, and if for some reason you don't want to do that or can't, then the Data Working Group normally takes care of it if they become aware of the problem. > > I do agree that it would be good to have some indication on the main > screen, as to whether you have accepted the licence or not. > > >> The CT isn't a license, it's a terms of agreement. That means you've >> given OSMF a license to the data, and now you're asking them to revoke >> that license. > > ... because he has subsequently found out that he has no legal right to > give that data to OSMF, and has infact commited an offence himself. The > data that he contributed, that he's asking them to revoke, was invalid > in the first place. > > It does raise one interesting question though (which I believe SHOULD be > on legal-talk but Ill ask here since it fits with the rest of the > thread). If a user becomes aware they have contributed data in this > situation, and asks OSMF to remove the data or at least to not relicence > the data, and OSMF doesnt remove or does relicence, does the fact the > user asked for the data to be removed, remove any liability from the > user for the violation? Does this put OSMF in a liable position, by > refusing to remove data that it knows is in breach of copyright and its > own terms? I guess it'd be up to Steve or the DWG to remove it even though the contributions may be compatible with some future version of the CT, but currently they're not and there's no way to unset the flag and no way to register a new account with original contributor terms :( Cheers _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
