On 17 April 2011 16:56, 80n <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 2:17 PM, Francis Davey <[email protected]> wrote: >> On 17 April 2011 13:30, 80n <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> The question is whether you can upload a CC-BY-SA licensed work under >>> any other license than CC-BY-SA? >> >> I am sorry if I misunderstood your original question. I am not quite >> sure I understand this one. What do you mean by "upload .. .under" a >> licence? That doesn't make sense to me. Do you mean, "does CC-BY-SA" >> permit a contributor to contribute to OSMF under the existing >> contributor terms? (Answer: no) or do you mean something else? > > Sorry, I was using jargon here which probably only makes sense to > those very familiar with the OSM context. I'll try to make myself a > little clearer. > > Suppose there is a creative work that has been published with a > CC-BY-SA license. Suppose I take that work and make from it a > derivative work. Can I then give a copy of that derivative work to a > third party who insists that it is provided to them under an agreement > that is like the OSM Contributor Terms 1.2.4? > > In other words, if I've agreed to the current contributor terms, does > the act of submitting CC-BY-SA licensed content to OSM voilate the > terms of the CC-BY-SA license? > > As a bit of background, the process of modifying the OSM map is a > three step process: > 1) A user gets a subset of the map from the OSM web-site > 2) The user makes modifications to that map on their own computer > 3) The user gives the modifications back to OSMF via the OSM web-site. > > All content within the OSM database is published as CC-BY-SA 2.0. > This extends comprehensively however it is obtained. There is no > special route that content takes when someone wants to edit something. > They request a subset of the map (step 1) which is downloaded to the > user's computer where they then modify it (step 2). This subset is > licensed under CC-BY-SA just like any other content from OSM and their > modifications are a Derivative Work. > > When user has finished modifying the map they then send it back to OSM > (step 3) and in doing so they affirm that the modified content is > granted to OSMF under a "worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, > perpetual, irrevocable licence", or whatever the version of the > contributor terms are that they originally signed up to. > > It seems to me that the CTs get in the way of the loop that is > supposed to exist that permits someone to get OSM content, modify it, > and then give it back. If the content in this loop is CC-BY-SA > licensed then putting up a CT gateway or barrier would appear to break > that loop. > >>
80n see: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/node/315754580/history This is just silly. jumped-the-license yet? Are you going to start suing fellow OSM contributors now? Kindly sue me, you know my address. Regards Grant _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
