On 2010-11-28 21:30, Francis Davey wrote:
There are two possible answers (I have no idea which applies, or if
both applies):
(i) The data may actually be protected, eg by the sui generis database
right that applies in the European Union and EEA, just because it is
"just facts" doesn't mean there is no IP in it - and worse maybe some
of what has been contributed is in fact a "map" or part of a map and
so protected by normal copyright.
I think (after the reading the last hours) I found somehow the problem:
I understood that the database as a whole is protected but thought that
this doesn't affect the data (the simple points). But under the new
european database law, the person who puts the data into the database is
protected (or rather his data) although the data is not
copyright-protected outside.
I'm not sure if thats the right wording/thinking but somehow in that
direction :-).
For me that's a little bit weird and I think also the people who created
this aren't sure anymore
(http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/internal_market/evaluation/evaluationdatabasesdirective.pdf
- page 24/5.2)
(ii) As a matter of principle (not of law), contributors have been
agreeing to one licence and one might think it was good practice to
ask them to agree to a difference licence - just because you can take
something legally doesn't mean you should.
I agree. In a community work like this one should fight each other in
front of the court.
But I also think that in a big community as OSM now is the existence of
a veto (every user has to be asked) isn't workable (we have the same
problem in the EU :-), and therefore I think the new CT should be
introduced as soon as possible :-).
Bye, Andreas
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
