Am 22.09.2015 um 11:05 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > Is there a problem with the current license? Is it not clear from a > legal point of view, how it should be interpreted? Please read the introduction to the proposed guideline. > > I must admit I feel some reluctance towards the practise of > introducing more and more examples and guidelines how to interpret the > legal text, because every additional word is augmenting the risk of > introducing loopholes and weakening our position in a potential > prosecution of infringers. Also, according to the mandate the OSMF is > given from the original IP holders by means of the CTs, any > modification of the current license has to be approved by a majority > of active contributors. > > Is the OSMF consulting with their legal advisors before publishing > these amendments/interpretations? > > Finally, the OSMF in the past didn't seem to care about prosecution of > actual infringers. Is there any example where some action was taken? > Is someone from the OSMF checking this list from time for instance: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution ? > > FWIW, apple maps continues big scale infringement, e.g. their map app > in the most recent OS (OX-X 10.10.5) has the attribution very hidden, > it is neither on the screen nor when you print a map (but you can get > to it by clicking in the menu on "Maps"->"About Maps" and then on > "Data from TomTom and others ->" (on my system nothing happens after > the click, but that's likely just a bug)). Also Apple's "Friends" app > on iOS has no attribution whatsoever. Please stick to the topic at hand. Simon
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
