On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 11:41 AM, 80n <80n...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 2:10 PM, Anthony <o...@inbox.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 7:15 AM, Jean-Marc Liotier <j...@liotier.org>wrote: >> >>> The quality of OpenStreetMap's work speaks for itself, but it seems that >>> we need to speak about it too - especially now that Google is attempting >>> to to appear as holding the moral high ground by using terms such as >>> "citizen cartographer" that they rob of its meaning by conveniently >>> forgetting to mention the license under which the contributed data is >>> held. >> >> >> "By submitting User Submissions to the Service, you give Google a >> perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license >> to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly >> display, distribute, and create derivative works of the User Submission. " >> > > Compared to: > "You hereby grant to OSMF and any party that receives Your Contents a > worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable license to do > any act that is restricted by copyright over anything within the Contents, > whether in the original medium or any other." >
There's a big difference between giving rights only to Google and giving them to everyone. And the text you quote is only "Draft 0.9". Considering that it's tantamount to requiring everyone to declare their contributions as public domain, I find it hard to imagine it'll be adopted.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
