On 8 December 2010 21:54, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen <g.grem...@cetest.nl> wrote:
[snip] > > 2. Article 3 makes you transfer the ownership (not exclusive) of your > entered data to OSMF : That is a Problem !! > > OSMF is gathering this way the (non exclusive)ownership of OSM as a whole. > > OSMF is not a community but a foundation/association (company by guarantee > in british legal terms) > > The transfer of ownership is against it own principles > But there is no transfer of ownership. All that the CT's do is give OSMF a licence. If you want OSMF to maintain a server hosting OSM data then it needs a licence to do _that_. In practice you want it to be able to license the data (via a sublicence) to other people, otherwise there would be legal obstacles to people using it. The only alternative is to ask contributors to license the world using some compatible licence and then for OSMF to try to be licence transparent as some other sites do (knol for instance). Either way the contributor licenses. The former seems (to me) to be easier and less problematic. > > > Wiki Citation: > > It is important to understand that the OpenStreetMap Foundation is not the > same thing as the OpenStreetMap project. The Foundation does not own the > OpenStreetMap data, is not the copyright holder and has no desire to own the > data. Anyone can set up a few servers and host the OSM data using the same > or different software. In this respect the Foundation is an organisation > that performs fundraising in order to provides servers to host the project. > Its role is to support the project, not to control it. > > > > Try to match article 3 with this wiki citation… > > > > This needs to be cleared up. > I've seen this point discussed many times before. The CT's do not transfer ownership. What do you advocate? -- Francis Davey _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
