Re: [OSM-dev] [OSM-legal-talk] Bittorrent
Hi, Francis Davey wrote: In almost all jurisdictions various information rights are property rights, which means they operate against everyone. The licence is a permission to use (say a work) without violation of the rights holders rights. I.e. the default is total restriction, which may only be bypassed via the licence. It is irrelevant whether a use of the information is aware of the licence since it is permissive not restrictive (although it may be constructed by stating exceptions to a generally given permission). Everything you say is true, but unless you have just joined the project you must be aware that the new license being contemplated - the Open Database License - rests heavily on the European idea of database rights, and tries to supplant them by a contract for jurisdictions that have no sui generis database protection. A contract of course requires agreement by those who are party to it before it can be of legal relevance. (Maybe you're reading this on dev and are unaware of the 1000+ postings in the previous year on legal-talk about the matter...?) Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
Re: [OSM-dev] [OSM-legal-talk] Bittorrent
Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org writes: Everything you say is true, but unless you have just joined the project you must be aware that the new license being contemplated - the Open Database License - rests heavily on the European idea of database rights, and tries to supplant them by a contract for jurisdictions that have no sui generis database protection. A contract of course requires agreement by those who are party to it before it can be of legal relevance. (Maybe you're reading this on dev and are unaware of the 1000+ postings in the previous year on legal-talk about the matter...?) As a random data point, I read your note on talk but am not subscribed to legal-t...@. It would be nice to have a monthly summary of where the licensing discussion is and a sense of what the debate is posted to t...@. It would particularly interesting to see the discussion around expected impacts to free distribution of planet dumps. Of course I could join legal, but I think it's probably good for the health of the project for everyone to see an abstract. pgpjcDoM5ukJx.pgp Description: PGP signature ___ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
Re: [OSM-dev] [OSM-legal-talk] Bittorrent
Hi, Francis Davey wrote: No, but nevertheless no. I'll review go over the posting history. Thanks. ;-) If you use Google to search the legal-talk list for the words browsewrap and clickwrap (sometimes hyphenated) you will find a lot of the relevant discussion. I'll try to put it in as little words as possible: 1. If we could be sure our data was copyrighted then we would not really have a problem since, as you point out, everybody would have to adhere to our licensing terms to legally use our data. 2. We're pretty sure that we cannot be sure our data is copyrighted, so we try to enforce our license through the concept of database rights which is reasonably well established in Europe; even un-copyrighted data gains a protection comparable to copyright, and again, our license has to be adhered to by users. 3. Headache comes from places without database rights (like the US) where anyone getting hold of our data could simply do anything with it. Even for those who think that our data should be put in the Public Domain anyway (e.g. me), this is undesirable because it would create a wholly different situation in the US than we have in Europe. 4. Because of this, the ODbL tries to be a contract and a license at the same time, forcing users in places like the US to adhere to our license through contract law. 5. It is somewhat unclear, and one of the questions posed on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Open_Issues, what legal consequences would arise from some bad guy stripping away the contract information and republishing our data in a non-database country; the worst case for us would probably be if this would lead to third parties being able to use our data totally unrestricted with impunity, even if they know the data comes from OSM. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
Re: [OSM-dev] [OSM-legal-talk] Bittorrent
Hi, Greg Troxel wrote: Of course I could join legal, but I think it's probably good for the health of the project for everyone to see an abstract. I agree that this would be good but it would need a very balanced and unbiased person to write it, because the role of writer of abstracts to the masses carries quite some political power. It would be relatively easy to find some people to summarize the status quo as ODbL introduction is going along nicely, slowed down a bit but basically proceeding to plan, everyone does their bit and we're moving in the right direction, great people doing an awesome job, and it would be equally easy to find people summarizing the status quo as major showstoppers still unclear and likely to remain so, legal opinion split, ODbL dead in the water. The difficulty is finding out which of these descriptions is true, or more likely, where in between these two reality lies... Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
