On 27 Apr 2009, at 20:33, Mike Collinson wrote:
The Open Data Commons have announced their release schedule as
follows.
Wed 29th Apr (next wed): public release of 1.0 RC (Release Candidate)
Wed 6th May (following wed): comments period on 1.0 RC close
Wed 13th May (following wed): 1.0 Released
Both releases should appear at:
http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/
The intent of the 1.0 release candidate is not for suggestions for
major new alterations but for people to check on changes they have
made and spot any glaring errors.
Sounds good and its good to see there is still movement.
ITO has still not had any response to the our legal review. There are
some very serious issues raised in the review and we hope that many
have been addressed.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ITO_World/ODbL_Licence_0.9_legal_review_for_ITO
The community has not had any formal legal comments on the Use Cases
page about which ones will work and which will not.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_Licence/Use_Cases
Is the Foundation proposing to get any independent reviews done on
v1.0 by our current commercial users of OSM data? It has been
suggested that end-users such as Flickr, ITN News, Multimap should
confirm that the license works them? Clearly it will be embarrassing
for both parties if Flickr or other people already using the data have
a problem with it.
ITO will aim to carry out a further review pass between the 29th April
and the 6th May and will again publish their comments again. It will
be a challenge to do this at such short notice over a bank holiday
weekend, however we think we will be able to do the work before then.
In order to allow the review to proceed efficiently with this further
review can the foundation licensing group ensure that:-
1) The Use Case page is updated with legal council views on each one.
It may actually be more helpful to publish this as a .pdf containing
both the version of the Use Cases that was reviewed and the legal
comments response - we can then keep the Use Case wiki page free to
change over time in response to this review.
2) Publish a mark-up version showing the changes to both the FIL and
the ODbL as well as a clean copy of the same.
Regards,
Peter
Mike
___
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