I have updated the wiki 'brief' to reflect a number of issues raised in the
past few days.
1) I have removed all references to 'public' in the brief and now ensure
that Derived Database are distributed at least as widely as the end-user
experience itself and that others are free to distribute it
If someone forks the project then the fork should be able to
operate on exactly the same basis as the original project.
On closer inspection, this will never be possible. If you fork OSM,
It's worth noting that it isn't possible to fork OSM on the same terms
at the moment, even keeping
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
I am trying to restrain myself from replying to any of the other 9876
messages in this thread because It Has All Been Said Before.
Me too. ;-)
- Rob.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
legal-talk
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 01:58:19AM +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
their aerial imagery from. - Ed Parsons once said that Google had to pay
extra for traceable aerial imagery as the normal licenses would not
have been suitable for using the material in an application like
MapMaker. If none of
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 12:17:50AM +0100, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
It shouldn’t be about specifically contributing back to OSM. Ivan has
already pointed out this fails the desert island and dissident tests
used as rules of thumb for the Debian Free Software Guidelines.
Could I please ask
Dair Grant wrote:
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
b. A file containing all of the alterations made to the Database
offered
under this Licence, including any additional Data, that make
up all the
differences between the Database and the Derivative Database.
Assuming I choose option
