Is there a problem with the current license? Is it not clear from a legal point of view, how it should be interpreted? I must admit I feel some reluctance towards the practise of introducing more and more examples and guidelines how to interpret the legal text, because every additional word is augmenting the risk of introducing loopholes and weakening our position in a potential prosecution of infringers. Also, according to the mandate the OSMF is given from the original IP holders by means of the CTs, any modification of the current license has to be approved by a majority of active contributors.
Is the OSMF consulting with their legal advisors before publishing these amendments/interpretations? Finally, the OSMF in the past didn't seem to care about prosecution of actual infringers. Is there any example where some action was taken? Is someone from the OSMF checking this list from time for instance: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution ? FWIW, apple maps continues big scale infringement, e.g. their map app in the most recent OS (OX-X 10.10.5) has the attribution very hidden, it is neither on the screen nor when you print a map (but you can get to it by clicking in the menu on "Maps"->"About Maps" and then on "Data from TomTom and others ->" (on my system nothing happens after the click, but that's likely just a bug)). Also Apple's "Friends" app on iOS has no attribution whatsoever.
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
