On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Ed Avis <[email protected]> wrote: > The current contributor terms for new accounts require you grant a licence to > the OSMF to do 'any act that is restricted by copyright', subject to section 3 > which says that OSMF will distribute under CC-BY-SA, ODbL/DbCL, or 'another > free > and open licence'. Since you are not the copyright holder for the OS OpenData > content, I don't believe you can grant such a licence to the OSMF. > > If you interpret the text more loosely and don't require that you grant a > licence > as it says, but instead that you make sure the OSMF has the necessary > permission > one way or another, then they still aren't quite right, because the permission > given by the Ordnance Survey doesn't really allow 'any free and open licence'.
This is exactly the problem I see with the proposed CT's that many people have already voiced. It creates an incompatibility with any non-PD data sources. The CT's llow the possible relicense of OSM data in the future, but that comes at the price of restricting any incorperation of any "free" but not PD datasets into OSM. But I suppose if that is what the OSMF wants then that is fine thats their choice. _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
