On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 10:55 AM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com> wrote: > That would be a very narrow and strict interruption of cc-by-sa,
The definition of a derivative work is pretty clear. "... a work based upon the Work or upon the Work and other pre-existing works, ..., or any other form in which the Work may be recast, transformed, or adapted,..." Modifying content that has been downloaded from OSM is a transformation based upon the Work and (presumably) other pre-existing works (such as tracklogs or imagery). The test of this would be to try using JOSM to contribute without doing a download first. You will not get a good outcome. > especially since the assumption is a derivative is required by the > user to generate any changes made when the source of their changes > would matter just as much. > > For example if they are using GPS data all they would use existing > data for is to work out what doesn't need to be done. > > Same would go for the Canadian mass import currently occurring,same > goes for other data imports such as OS. > > The only time it would matter is for things like extrapolation the > position of streets based on the location of existing streets. Yes, it's editing of *existing* content that is the breach, not the contribution of pure new content in a previously mapped area or when an import is performed without reference to existing content. > > IANAL etc > > On 4/17/11, 80n <80n...@gmail.com> wrote: >> It would seem to me that anyone who has agreed to the contributor >> terms and who then edits content that is published by OSM is in breach >> of the CC-BY-SA license. >> >> Currently the OSM database is published as a CC-BY-SA work. If that >> content is downloaded from the OSM database and modified then this >> creates a derived work. >> >> If that derived work is loaded back to OSM then it can only be done so >> under the same license by which it was received, namely CC-BY-SA. >> That's the nature of the share alike clause in CC-BY-SA. But anyone >> who has agreed to the contributor terms is claiming that they can >> contribute this content under a different license. >> >> Now I know that it is the intention of OSMF to delete any such >> content, but in fact anyone who has edit such CC-BY-SA derived works >> is already in actual breach of the license under which they *received* >> that content. >> >> If you have agreed to the contributor terms you are likely to be >> breaching the terms of CC-BY-SA. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> legal-talk mailing list >> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >> > > -- > Sent from my mobile device > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
