On Sun, Dec 6, 2009 at 1:59 AM, Anthony <o...@inbox.org> wrote: > I'm not sure if it's enforceable or not. And I've asked on the legal list > (so far without an answer) whether or not agreeing to the Contributor Terms > requires also agreeing to the ODbL in ways that purport to reach beyond > copyright law (which, here in Florida, is not very far).
it's my understanding that agreeing to the contributor terms doesn't require agreeing to anything that "purports" to reach beyond copyright law. the license was written by a lawyer well-versed in US IP law and reviewed by another working (pro bono) on behalf of the OSMF who is also well-versed in US IP law. there are contractual components to the ODbL, but these are necessary as several lawyers have expressed doubt that copyright law alone can protect OSM data, especially in the US. for more information, please read the proposal document: http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/File:License_Proposal.pdf > I'd be willing to release my contributions into the public domain. But I > won't agree to further restrictions on the OSM database which go beyond > copyright law. Someone else pointed out that that's what Google does. > Yeah, I thought OSM was supposed to be better than that. well, that's unfortunate. it would really help if we could understand why you don't feel you could agree to the contractual parts of the ODbL. they are there for a good reason and weren't included frivolously. > In any case, I see little chance of the switch being made under the terms > outlined. Between people who refuse the Contributor Terms and people who > just never respond, there's likely going to be *way* too much to delete. we would obviously like to minimise the number of people who don't want to agree. we would like to be as inclusive as possible, but as several people have said already, we've been through a number of consultation periods, so we thought we'd ironed out most of the major objections. please remember, we've been working for a while to find a license for OSM which works, and protects the data we've all worked on. ODbL does this much better than CC BY-SA, which likely doesn't work at all in some jurisdictions. ODbL has very much the same license elements as CC BY-SA - it's an attribution and share-alike license. there are some differences, mostly in the underlying law used to enforce it and the way it concentrates on share-alike for the data, not the produced works. cheers, matt _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk