I posted a query about various 'Use Cases' for OSM data in regard to the new
licence on the 7th Feb. See archive here:

http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2008-February/000680.htm
l

 

I was concerned to see that the answers received were not conclusive and
that no response has been given by a qualified lawyer. With regard to the
brief for this licence and the acceptance procedure for the completed
licence I recommend that we:

 

1)      Agree aims of the license in non-legal terms as a set of Use Cases
on the wiki.

2)      Agreed in advance an acceptance test for each Use Case; for example
if the use case is using OSM mapping of Bagdad for an ITN news item about
Iraq then we ask ITN to check the proposed licence and say if it is
acceptable to them or not. If we want the data to be usable by Mutlimap
within their current page structure then we ask them to ask their lawyer to
sign it off. If we don't want people to strip the footpaths and add then to
a commercial road data and sell it then we agree to get the licence checked
by an independent lawyer in this respect.

3)      Get a licence written that meets these use cases to the greatest
extent possible.

4)      Test the licence via the use cases using the agreed mechanisms.

5)      Recommend the licence for adoption by the community.

 

 

 

 

Regards,

 

 

 

 

Peter Miller

 

_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/legal-talk

Reply via email to