Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Change - moving forward
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Mike Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote: If you support the share-alike concept, I urge you to accept the new Contributor Terms which provides for a coherent Attribution, Share-Alike license written especially for databases. If you are a Public Domain license supporter, we are divided as a community on which is best and I do urge you to give this one a good try. The Contributor Terms is expressly written to allow us to come back in future years and see what is best without all this fuss about procedure. And if you'd just really like all this hoo-haa to go away and get back to mapping, well, please say yes. One question: Given that you can't (legitimately) sign up to the CT if you have used data which you are not the copyright owner how will we deal with the situation where someone who HAS imported external data signs up to the Contributor Terms? In some ways it is their own problem, they have warranted that they are the legal owner and accepted responsibility for any resulting copyright infringement but this seems a trifle unfair since they may not have understood the implications and it also still leaves OSMF to resolve the future copyright disputes. -- Brian ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Compatible licenses
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 8:01 AM, James Livingston li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote: * Currently you can import any data with a compatible licence (e.g. CC-BY-SA, CC-BY), you can't if we change without the copyright holder's permission This is a tremendous improvement in my opinion. I'd like to see every data publisher as informed and enthusiastic about having contributed to OpenStreetMap as the everyday mapper. Have the Ordnance Survey given permission to OSMF for data to be imported under the terms of the contributor agreement? My reading of the contributor terms is that I have to be the copyright owner of all data I add. But some of the data I've added recently was based on OSSV tracing and as such I don't own the copyright - I'm licensed to use it SS-BY by Ordnance Survey. As such as of the second I added something based on licensed data I am unable to sign up to the contributor terms. Please correct me if you spot a mistake here - I'd love to know what I've missed. -- Brian ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] PD vs SA: The eternal battle
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 11:27 AM, bvh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Actually no, your bus company is just going to take PD-OSM data and is going to bring out a map with its bus routes. And its competitor is going to do the same. And no one will have the ability to take both maps and bring out one comprehensive 'public transport' map for your town containing routes from all bus companies. The consumer loses. Just to point out that under the new license (and probably the current one) they can do this anyway - and so can the fast food chains and most anyone else. They just create it as a seperate layer or as pins on the map and as a result don't have to contribute their data back. -- Brian ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC Attribution Share Alike License with OSMF exception
OK, so either not OSMF (but a group setup for the purpose) or OSMF with better protections for who can be a board member. How about a group made up of interested parties with a minimum amount of data submitted to OSM... :-) Or is the basic idea flawed as well? -- Brian On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 12:23 PM, 80n [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Sep 5, 2008 at 12:07 PM, Brian Quinion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Been reading all the discussions for a while with growing frustration. I find my self mostly agreeing with the CC-By-SA license but I do wish there was a way to easily provide exceptions to those organisations wishing to make good use of the data but having problems with the license. So my questions is this: would it be possible for the contributors to OSM (in addition to releasing the data as CC-By-SA) to also grant a license to the OSMF to use the data for ANY purpose? and to be able to in turn also license the data on other projects / organisations by unanimous vote? I'd be willing to trust the OSMF to only release the data under license for suitable purposes. For instance they could license it to npe with an explicit agreement that using it to geocode postcodes did not constitute a derivative work.Or they could give definitive interpretations of what was covered by CC-By-SA and back it up with their own license agreement if there was ever a dispute. Is this just stupid, or is this an easy way out of the bind the project now seems to find itself in? I guess it really comes down to if people would be willing to trust OSMF... At the recent election for the OSMF board there were 26 members who voted. It costs £15 to become a member. So it would cost about £500 to elect your own board. I wouldn't trust OSMF with my data. Etienne (OSMF Treasurer) -- Brian ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Mass import of TeleAtlas data
As an aside, I was unable to find any information / suggestions / procedure documented on the wiki as what to do if you suspect someone is copying data from a copyright source which means it is left pretty much up to each person to decide what to do. So far the procedure seems to be: 1) Contact the user via their talk page with the evidence. Be polite - you might be wrong or they might have permission. 2) If there is no response (after 5 days) or you are deeply unconvinced by the response post your evidence to the legal-talk mailing list (or your country specific mailing list if you think this would be more appropriate). 3) The OSM community as a whole will take it from there. I realise that this sounds rather bureaucratic but I think some guidelines would be helpful. If the above is pretty much correct I'll add it to the FAQ on the wiki. -- Brian On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 2:06 PM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, The right place would obviously be user Pranas' inbox. Have you at least made an attempt talking to him before demanding, in public, that all his contributions should be deleted? I have to admit that the very detailed examples that Albertas brought up in his mail, do look convincing Sure they do. But even *if* that user was importing proprietary data wholesale it could be a misunderstanding, and one could at least make an attempt to clarify this with him and only go public if that doesn't get one anywhere. (For all you know, that guy could even have a written ok from TeleAtlas for what he's doing, or more likely from those people from whom TeleAtlas get their data, or whatever.) I'm just saying that we should not publicly talk about what someone does without at least making an attempt to contact him - FIRST. If he says go away it's none of your business then you can still go public. Bye Frederik ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
