On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Kate Chapman <k...@maploser.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This has come up before. HOT is part of a pilot for the initiative
> "Imagery to the Crowd" (1). Representatives of HOT and the US
> Government met multiple times in all day meetings to discuss what the
> NextView license means as well as to have the vectors available under
> ODbL.
You make it sound like nobody involved had permission to speak for the
OpenStreetMap Foundation. The Foundation and project would
potentially be put at risk by a failure in interpretation. I'd expect
LWG (at minimum, with Foundation legal representation and Board
oversight) would have to be involved for any such meeting. Otherwise,
you've got n-parties at a table making decisions for a party not
present.
Were any potential data donor, or imagery donor in this case, able to
state, "I grant use of {dataset} to OpenStreetMap contributors for use
under the terms of the OpenStreetMap License and Contributor Terms,"
well that might be a useful shortcut.
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
