Ben,
Ben Laenen schreef: > >> But, concidering storing the original files in some central place, the >> issue is that I have a spoken agreement with the person who provided >> these files "for uploading them to the openstreetmap-project". I have >> never spoken to him about giving these files to other people or >> something like that. >> > > But by uploading to OSM you're basically doing just that: giving it away to > other people. Not at all. There is a difference between "data" (i.e. the raw *content* of a file) and "information" (which is the data + the license + its intended use). It goes without saying that if somebody provides you something for free (be it a material good or a immaterial) for a specific purpose, you should respect that intended-use. > So I do not understand your point here. By giving it to OSM through you he > basically said it's OK to distribute under OSM license. So you can make the > file by itself available under the same license. No I cannot. HE can, but not me! And he has not; so it's not up to me to redistribute the data. That's it. End of story. > You just never know what will happen in future with the data, and we might > need it again, and you may not be around then. > Well, you know. Legally speaking, if I (as person) would sign an agreement with a municipality for an electronic streetmap saying "you are allowed to upload the data to the openstreetmap-server, under the osm-license; and keep one copy for yourself as backup", it's my responability to make sure that the backup-files are well protected and can -indeed- only be used for that intended use (i.e. as backup). So if I would just drop these backup-files on a server somewhere, where I have no control over who has access to them; who can copy them, (e.g.) make a copy of them and resell them, I would at least violate the spirit of the agreement with the content-owner. I know this all sounds a bit far-fetched but the point I want to make is that -if you receive data from a 3t party- this will automatically also give your certain obligations, both legal and moral and it's up to you to respect that! >> That's exactly one of the reasons why I think some kinf of "written >> agreement" would not be a bad thing. At least, it provides clearity on >> who does what, what information is stored where, etc. >> In the end, this is in the interest of everybody! >> > > Well, it would look more formal, but in the end an OSM Belgium vzw wouldn't > be > more official than you as a private person. You could have signed a contract > with him just as well if you want a written agreement to be sure no problems > could arise in future. I don't think the envelope of a non-profit > organization > would mean its members aren't vulnerable to those claims. > I'm sorry but IMHO you are completely wrong. If you -as a person- work for a vzw (payed or unpayed), it's the vzw that is legally responsable for your actions, not you! The main element is that you have to be "under control and supervision" of the vzw; but if that condition is met; it's just like any employer-employee relationship. It's the employer that is responsability of the action of its employees! Now, as you say "it will look more formal", but I don't think you should underestimate this. Look at this from the point of view of a "schepen van ruimtelijke ordening". Somebody you have never heard or seen of comes to you and say "hey, I would like to have a copy of your electronic streetmap so we can place it on the internet". (and then continues some mumbo-jumbo about open-source content and all kind of other stuff you do not understand anything about). What do you think the "schepen" will think; and on what basis will of what will he or she make a descission? I don't think it's very difficult to see the difference between - on one side, just one geeky bloke asking this, or - on the other side: somebody -> representing a vzw, -> who can show examples of other munipalities who have also done this (with letters of their "schepen" to prove it) -> who offers a formal legal agreement (which you can be examined by the cities legal team, read: "if they agree and things go wrong, I have somebody else to blame"). That's going to make a hell of a difference! Perhaps it may sound a bit strange, but probably one of the most important things that should happen if / when a vzw would get created; is to make sure you get some kind of funding from (e.g.) a university or the some gouverment (Belgium, Brussels/Flanders/Wallonia, a province, ...). The main reason would not be the money; but the fact that this means the vzw is "officially recognised" as being a genuine organisation, for a genuine and serious cause and who can be trusted. This means that when you make a presentation to a schepen of a municipality, or somebody from "de lijn", "de post", the "nmbs", to get some data, one of the slides can be about "openstreetmap.be vzw" saying it is "funded by ... as socio-cultural organisation". After all, you have to persuade them to provide you -somebody they do not know anything about- with certain information. That's something you should not underestimate! > Greetings > Ben > Cheerio! Kr. Bonne.
<<attachment: kristoff_bonne.vcf>>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
