On 03/02/11 14:23, Anthony wrote:
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 5:23 AM, Jonathan Harley<j...@spiffymap.net> wrote:
On 03/02/11 04:21, Anthony wrote:
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Jonathan Harley<j...@spiffymap.net> wrote:
I think we may have differing interpretations of the intent of the
license.
Mine is that the license is supposed to allow people to use the map in a
variety of ways, online and in print, so long as any new data is open and
OSM is attributed; not that it was intended to prevent people from
creating
works in which not all elements are free.
I'm not sure where you're getting that "interpretation" from.
I'm partly guided by the idea that the ODbL is supposed to provide a better
expression of the same intent. I've always understood that the intent of the
ODbL was not to change the spirit of OSM licensing, just to clarify it.
Whose intent are we talking about, here?
The OSMF, I suppose, since they're driving the change.
The intent of some may have
been to use CC-BY-SA as though it were not a copyleft license (*), but
I seriously doubt that was the intention of most of us.
(*) To wit, Cloudmade seems to use it that way.
I assume you're referring to the fact that Cloudmade's tiles are not
released as CC-BY-SA but "Copyright Cloudmade", which I take as evidence
that simply rendering OSM's data is not considered altering,
transforming, or building upon OSM.
The
license doesn't even mention "data", and attribution is not enough.
OSM applies the license to data - the license attribution it requests
specifically mentions "Map data".
Again, who wrote the license attribution request? Not me. In fact,
I'm not even sure what license attribution request you're talking
about. If you mean the one in the slippy map, I consider that to be
incorrect. The entire work must be CC-BY-SA, not just the data.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright - if you think it's incorrect,
you should probably take that up with the OSMF, which is the publisher
of www.openstreetmap.org (so one can assume that the website represents
the OSMF's view).
Peter's right that 10 amateurs discussing interpretations isn't worth 1
legal professional.
Depends who the amateurs are. The interpretation of a single legal
professional is fairly worthless, unless you've paid that legal
professional for advice.
Absolutely. No doubt Cloudmade have done so, and Peter has said that he
will do at some stage. If I ever want to publish non-PD data on top of
an OSM map I will certainly do that too.
Jonathan.
--
Jonathan Harley : Managing Director : SpiffyMap Ltd
Email: m...@spiffymap.com Phone: 0845 313 8457 www.spiffymap.com
Post: The Venture Centre, Sir William Lyons Road, Coventry CV4 7EZ
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
