Richard Mann wrote: > But (unless I've missed something) that doesn't deal with the > issue that the CTs reserve the right to switch the data to > (amongst other things) a non-attribution licence at a future date.
Attribution is guaranteed by the Contributor Terms (section 4), which continue regardless of the licence chosen. In addition, the latest version of the CTs (1.2.3, at https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1sC0SrG_R6OkRDdC3IJKlmDEn2pYTY2DZfcpSLFdiBBU) only requires of the mapper that you grant rights "to the extent that you are able to do so". So you do not have to grant rights over OS data that you do not have. You are only asked (Section 1a) to ensure that "You have the right to authorize OSMF to use and distribute those Contents under our _current_ licence terms" (my emphasis). The Open Government Licence is compatible with ODbL, so contributions derived from OS OpenData are fine. Withdrawing incompatible data after a putative future licence change is OSMF's problem, not yours. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OS-have-switched-to-Open-Government-License-today-tp5895732p5899367.html Sent from the Great Britain mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
