See
https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1pPOFHo_o5inG9Ereh3Zn5ItmctZGRFbcmnKwtbyNkdM
item 7
Am 16.12.2011 14:08, schrieb Steve Bennett:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 7:03 PM, Frederik Ramm<frede...@remote.org> wrote:
* Agreeing user A creates the node with amenity=restaurant
* Disagreeing user B adds name=Fred's Pizza Place
* Agreeing user C changes name=Tom's Pasta Emporium
this node is clearly "clean" already, because it does not contain traces of
B's work any longer. However a quite similar example...
* Agreeing user A creates the node with amenity=restaurant
* Disagreeing user B adds name=Freds Pizza Place
* Agreeing user C changes name=Fred's Pizza Place
,,, suddenly isn't that clear-cut anymore. Has user C really surveyed the
place, or has he maybe just run a bot that used complex rules to "fix"
names?
Do we have any clear policy spelling out what constitutes "clean"?
Presumably there are some principles based on the "derived works"
language in Creative Commons (IIRC...) But do we really know what a
"derived work" for a single fact is?
Does the test "does not contain traces of non-CT-accepting users'
work" hold up? How is "trace" defined? etc etc
Steve
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
