On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Peter Miller <[email protected]> wrote:
> There does however appear to be something in the UK about 'fair > dealing'. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_dealing#Fair_dealing_in_the_United_Kingdom > > It seems a possible justification, but it may be a bit weak. Fair Dealing is a list of specific, quantified exceptions to copyright. It won't cover this unfortunately (IANAL, TINLA). >> Under American law, whatever you can get away with in court. >> > So what if someone in the US adds some data from a UN OCHA map to a > global CCBYSA project! I forget what happens when you "export" it. >> There can be no certainty unfortunately. >> > So what about a map from UNOCHA that makes no claim of copyright? Everything produced in a country that's a signatory to the Berne convention (and that's most countries) is *automatically* copyrighted, so UNOCHA don't need to claim copyright. > We are asking for permission in parallel, however we are not hopeful > about getting a quick response. Yes I can imagine that the UN won't move that fast. And I do appreciate that this is an urgent issue that needs a fast and good response to. Is it worth creating a quarantined/sandboxed/forked version of OSM for use specifically to track the conflict? Data from it could be rolled into the main map as it is "cleared". > Oh, so possibly we claim fair use and/or database directive whichever > is applicable! I do get the message that we should generally not use > this approach. > > > > Regards, > > > > Peter > > >> - Rob. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> legal-talk mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
