Francis Davey <[email protected]> wrote: > My specific point was that *if* you want the CT's to be permissive > about importation, then it is fairer on contributors and clearer to > provide an express list of compatible licenses - to avoid contributors > having to make the judgment themselves.
I think you should do this even if you don't want the CT's to be more permissive. Otherwise you will still get people thinking that data licensed under license X data is ok to add, or having to agonise over whether license Y is compatible or not. (Witness the arguments over whether people think CC-By or the OS OpenData License is compatible with the CTs.) Even if the normative list of compatible licenses is extremely short, it would still be of value. (Or more useful in this case, would be the implied list of incompatible licenses.) Presumably there could be a list of what the OSMF deems compatible licenses with the current CTs, but the problem here is that it's not formally linked to the CTs, and it's not clear who would be responsible if the list turned out to be incorrect. Even though the advice has come from OSMF, it would still be the mapper who has declared that the data was ok to add under the CTs. Even with the 1.1 draft CTs, ( https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_81272pvt54 ) there is still ambiguity in what "the copyright owner has given you permission to do so" means. IMO would be better to replace this with the options: either to have the copyright holder agree explicitly to the CT terms, or to have the license the data is released under appear on an official "approved license list". This way there is little room for error. As a mapper, you either get the copyright holder to agree to the CTs, or you check if their license is on the list. OSMF can also be much more confident that mappers have interpreted the CTs correctly, and have only added data under licenses that will allow whatever is deemed to be an appropriate amount of flexibility in the future. If OSMF want to impose non-standard restrictions on what can be included to give them more flexibility in the future, it seems right that they should be the ones taking responsibility for checking the compatibility of licenses with the CTs. Robert. -- Robert Whittaker _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
