On 2 Mar 2009, at 07:38, Gustav Foseid wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:03 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org
wrote:
Not so, it turns out; the Produced Work freedom allows us to combine
OSM data *only* with other data whose license does not prohibit the
addition of constraints, because
Hi,
80n wrote:
I can imagine a scenario where, for example, Google uses Amazon's Mechanical
Turk to pay lots of people to use Map Maker to trace from OSM's rendered
tiles.
Is this a scenario we could try to fight when it happens, instead of
complicating things upfront, or would it be too
On 2 Mar 2009, at 08:29, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Grant wrote in his announcement:
... Therefore, we have worked with the license authors and others to
build a suitable home where a community and process can be built
around
it. Its new home is with the Open Data Commons
2009/3/2 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org:
80n wrote:
I can imagine a scenario where, for example, Google uses Amazon's Mechanical
Turk to pay lots of people to use Map Maker to trace from OSM's rendered
tiles.
Is this a scenario we could try to fight when it happens, instead of
Peter Miller wrote:
Sent: 02 March 2009 8:57 AM
To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
Subject: [OSM-legal-talk] Who is ODC and why do we trust them?
On 2 Mar 2009, at 08:29, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Grant wrote in his announcement:
... Therefore, we have worked with the license
On 2 Mar 2009, at 09:30, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:
Btw, we don't have any published minutes from the OSMF for Jan or Feb
09 yet so we have no visibility of what decisions they have been
making which is a shame. I will email them and suggest that they
publish them to help in
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Simon Ward si...@bleah.co.uk wrote:
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 11:30:41AM -0500, Russ Nelson wrote:
Creative Commons license (by-sa). or under the ODbL. If you choose not to
give us your email address, or your email address stops working, you
waive all right to
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:40 PM, jean-christophe.haes...@dianosis.org wrote:
I found out recently about the license change issue, and I discover with
fear that everything looks decided. I feel I'm being rushed.
The licence discussion has been going on for a couple of *years* now.
It needs
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
OJ W wrote:
the ability to create an uncopiable map image from OSM data
does seem to have appeared in the ODbL license?
You can create an image and (provided that your image is not a data
base, a distinction that has
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:35 PM, OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
OJ W wrote:
the ability to create an uncopiable map image from OSM data
does seem to have appeared in the ODbL license?
You can create an image and
Hi,
Jean-Christophe Haessig wrote:
I surely understand that contributors’ names won’t disappear from OSM
itself, however with that clause, someone might make a copy of the
database, remove the names and redistribute it (only attributing to
OSM), which will in effect disable the users of this
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 8:36 PM, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.comwrote:
There has been some discussion of adding a tag into the planet.osm
header detailing that the data is licensed.
Also adding some contract text on http://planet.openstreetmap.org/ to
cover our non-eu-database-right
Grant,
Grant Slater wrote:
There has been some discussion of adding a tag into the planet.osm
header detailing that the data is licensed.
Actually this is exactly what the license suggests:
Quoting 4.2 (b)
[You must] Include a copy of this Licence [...] or
its Uniform Resource Identifier
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 8:47 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Quoting 4.2 (b)
[You must] Include a copy of this Licence [...] or
its Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) [...] both in the Database [...]
and in any relevant documentation
Sorry, overlooked that.
If this is in the
80n schrieb:
As far as I know there has been no attention paid to the FIL. It was
grabbed at the last minute from here
It doesn't look like it has been reviewed thoroughly (and the co-ment
page seem to be password protected.)
The requirement to include a copy of the license pretty much
Le lundi 02 mars 2009 à 14:14 +0100, Frederik Ramm a écrit :
No. If that were the case then OSM would have gone PD long ago and we
would all be mapping happily instead of wasting our time trying to
create freedom from the barrel of a license (kudos to JohnW for this
phrase).
Ok, I believe
I'd like to clarify the reason for two (2) licenses. The FIL is being
considered for individual atoms of data, while the ODbL is being
considered for major chunks of the database?
Is this correct?
Would it be helpful to:
[1] Determine what is an atom that the FIL would apply to.
[2] Determine
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 05:05:00AM +, Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
This needs a safeguard to allow for email addresses temporarily not
working. I’m not even sure this is the right thing to do anyway. It’s
far safer getting rid of a user’s data than it is assuming ownership of
it.
Some
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 08:08:58AM +, Peter Miller wrote:
I do not read the ODbL this way. I read that only persons bound by the
license/contract are prohibited from reverse engineering.
Clarification here is needed.
When we find an issue like this then lets document it on the wiki and
Hi,
Simon Ward wrote:
I’d prefer people carry on
discussing issues, here _and_ on the wiki,
+1... discuss stuff here, record on the Wiki, so that when the time
comes to judge whether a revised license addresses our concerns we can
tick off the issues from the Wiki pages.
Bye
Frederik
--
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 01:40:47PM +0100, jean-christophe.haes...@dianosis.org
wrote:
* Waivers : thankfully I cannot legally waive my moral rights in my
country, but I think it is unfair to require this form any person in the
world.
While I agree to collective attribution, I share some of
John Wilbanks schrieb:
In terms of OKF, hosting licenses is hard, and versioning licenses is
really hard, but OKF has been around for a while and is a solid group of
folks. If they are going to host your license you are way ahead of the
game in terms of having a group that is smart and
22 matches
Mail list logo
