On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 1:12 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 September 2010 07:21, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I think that most people would say that's a feature, not a problem.
But you aren't asking most people since you don't want to know the true
answer.
2010/8/31 Dirk-Lüder Kreie osm-l...@deelkar.net
Am 31.08.2010 12:30, schrieb Liz:
I was referring to user-mapped data. Imports have to fit the license,
not the other way around.
At the time of import the data imported fitted the licence.
Perhaps you had better look back at the archives
You would have had more luck sticking to one alias (Jane Smith), now
you're just making it obvious as to your goals.
I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that some are now stooping to
questionable tactics, but it just re-enforces the fact that I no
longer have any faith in those that are pushing
On 1 September 2010 16:16, Jane Smith janesmith...@gmail.com wrote:
But we know that his boks should be burnt. How can we allow Fredderik to
spread the gospel in his books when we know the 'new license' should be
brought down?
Tip for next time, be less overt, it allows the ruse to go on for
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 6:55 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
You would have had more luck sticking to one alias (Jane Smith), now
you're just making it obvious as to your goals.
John you are correct. The more we use our aliases the better.
But no I am not 80n or 80 m.
The
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 6:59 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 September 2010 16:16, Jane Smith janesmith...@gmail.com wrote:
But we know that his boks should be burnt. How can we allow Fredderik to
spread the gospel in his books when we know the 'new license' should be
On 1 September 2010 17:00, Jane Smith janesmith...@gmail.com wrote:
The longer we keep our secret about BigTinCan John
Oh goody a juicy secret... do tell, or should be have a sleep over and
play truth or dare?
___
legal-talk mailing list
On 1 September 2010 17:06, Jane Smith janesmith...@gmail.com wrote:
I need to gt my Dinner here in Sydney, but back later!
Did you have a good flight from Germany?
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:09 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 September 2010 17:00, Jane Smith janesmith...@gmail.com wrote:
The longer we keep our secret about BigTinCan John
Oh goody a juicy secret... do tell, or should be have a sleep over and
play truth or dare?
But
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:10 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
On 1 September 2010 17:06, Jane Smith janesmith...@gmail.com wrote:
I need to gt my Dinner here in Sydney, but back later!
Did you have a good flight from Germany?
Yar I ist eating mine fritter John.
can you
Hi,
John Smith wrote:
On 1 September 2010 16:04, Jane Smith janesmith...@gmail.com wrote:
John Smith and I know the Truth. Frederik's books should be burnt. He is an
Apostle of the 'new license'.
I would have said apostle of the CT because I highly doubt he'll be
content with the license...
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 3:35 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 September 2010 17:30, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
only the most presumptuous person would believe that a license they choose
today will automatically be the best license for the project for all time.
On 1 September 2010 17:58, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
That you claim that Frederik, or LWG, or OSMF Board are are trying to
speak for both people now and people in the future in the very same
breath is bold. You know perfectly well that term three gives the
decision on future
Hi,
John Smith wrote:
On 1 September 2010 17:30, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
only the most presumptuous person would believe that a license they choose
today will automatically be the best license for the project for all time.
The sheer arrogance of all this is astounding, you
On 1 September 2010 18:03, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I think it is nothing but selfish. You don't even know if you'll be in OSM
As I've stated in the past, which you conveniently keep ignoring, over
looking or misunderstanding...
You are putting end users of the data ahead of
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 3:35 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 1 September 2010 17:30, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
only the most presumptuous person would believe that a license they
choose
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 4:01 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 September 2010 17:58, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
That you claim that Frederik, or LWG, or OSMF Board are are trying to
speak for both people now and people in the future in the very same
breath is
On 09/01/2010 09:15 AM, 80n wrote:
Nobody is saying that CC-BY-SA is perfect.
But they are saying that it is unsuitable.
It isn't but it works. Look at how quickly Waze reacted. Not bad for
a broken license, eh?
Rely on people's good intentions is not a general solution.
The great
On 1 September 2010 18:30, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Still in OppositeLand, JohnSmith?
Can't figure out any better insults?
The Contributor Terms trust future OSM contributors to make the right
choices for future OSM licenses. Do you trust current and future OSM
At least be
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 4:15 AM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Frederik's argument that we cannot predict what future generations will want
is quite fallacious.
Really? What will future generations want, 80n? I predict that
future generations will want Flying cars sure, but we were promised
On 1 September 2010 18:46, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On the other hand, six-ish years ago there was no concern that we
would have to be compatible with OS data. Now, they publish open data
And how compatible will the CTs be with OS data exactly?
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 4:37 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, we contributors are being treated with contempt alright, besides
not being asked what we contributors want, since this whole thing
started it's been nothing but dirty tricks to try and get the license
changed.
On 1 September 2010 19:07, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
If you don't want the effects of a PD OSM for geodata, ODbL is a better way
of ensuring this than BY-SA
The devil you know is better than the devil you don't
At this stage I have every reason to believe the CT and now possible
the
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 4:37 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, we contributors are being treated with contempt alright, besides
not being asked what we contributors want, since this whole thing
started
On 1 September 2010 19:12, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Every time OSM contributors have been asked, they have supported ODbL
Is this like all the laywers that think the ODBL is great too?
about 12,500 contributors make up about 99% of the data, how many of
those agree with your point
On Wed, 1 Sep 2010 05:12:21 -0400, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com
wrote:
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 4:37 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, we contributors are being treated with contempt alright, besides
not being asked what we contributors want, since this whole thing
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_%28Internet%29
A sockpuppet is an online identity used for purposes of deception
within an online community.
The rash of posts by Jane Smith and 80 m are examples sockpuppetry
at its worst. If you care for this kind of thing, take it elsewhere.
It's not
On 1 September 2010 09:53, Mikel Maron mikel_ma...@yahoo.com wrote:
PLEASE
Indeed.
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 10:31 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 September 2010 19:22, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
And wage a campaign of reverting pages on the wiki[1], or hiding major
Shhh don't mention the thread on the tagging list about this, it might
On 1 September 2010 10:36, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_%28Internet%29
A sockpuppet is an online identity used for purposes of deception
within an online community.
The rash of posts by Jane Smith and 80 m are examples sockpuppetry
at its
On 1 September 2010 19:38, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
Please, stop being so childish about all this. Most people would be
mortified if they realised how much trouble they were causing, even
inadvertently. Whereas you seem to be relishing it, and egging
yourself on to annoy
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 09:22:12PM +0200, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 9:24 AM, Albertas Agejevas a...@pov.lt wrote:
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 01:12:16AM +0200, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Want an example of a use case DB integration? Consider
On 1 September 2010 19:59, Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com wrote:
My comments have nothing to do with the debate or any issues you
Then perhaps you should have used another thread with a more
appropriate subject line to avoid confusion?
My comments are intended to address your disruptive
On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, Richard Weait wrote:
The OSMF are
OpenStreetMap contributors.
However
OpenStreetMap contributors != OSMF
because OSMF is a subset of contributors
(although being a contributor is not a prerequisite, so this may not be
completely true).
Anthony schrieb:
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Robert Kaiserka...@kairo.at wrote:
Actually, IMHO, it's was wrong of the OSM project to do neither a copyright
assignment nor a license that has a clear clause on automatic possibility of
upgrade to a newer license in the same spirit (i.e. and
Francis Davey schrieb:
Agreeing with the person you assign to that they will only use the
copyright in certain ways won't protect you against a subsequent
assignee of the copyright (eg OSMF assigns to XXX Ltd), subject to
certain exceptions.
While that may be true, anyone not trusting the
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 3:30 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Contrary to what John seems to believe, I would be quite content with the
new license - not exactly in love with it, but content is a good word I
think
When did you come to that conclusion, and why? Weren't you opposed
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 4:03 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I think there may be a misunderstanding here. The clause 3 in the
contributor terms is precisely there because we want to *avoid* speaking for
people in the future. Anyone arguing against that basically says: Well of
John,
there's hardly a single message of yours in which I fail so find
something inappropriate.
For example this:
John Smith wrote:
On 1 September 2010 21:21, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
The devil is in the details.
CT+ODBL has a lot of fine print...
is just unsuitable for a
On 1 September 2010 20:52, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
Also I don't see how CC-By-SA 3.0 explicitly does not apply to
databases more than 2.0. It explicitly applies to things like maps
however (possibly this only means maps as images though)
It is my understanding that they
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 3:55 PM, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 September 2010 20:52, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
Also I don't see how CC-By-SA 3.0 explicitly does not apply to
databases more than 2.0. It explicitly applies to things like maps
however
On Sep 1, 2010, at 3:17 PM, Liz wrote:
The complete lack of any arguments left in the brains of the pro-ODbL lobby
shows in the complete falling apart of any discussion on this list, with
previously thoughtful people concentrating on personal attacks on others,
mostly claiming that they
Well we try to answer questions as quickly as possible. Some answers
depend on further meetings, others depend on replies from busy
professionals. Some answers get lost in the mundane reality of day to
day life.
Here are a couple of answers for questions that were asked a few weeks
back. Not
On 1 September 2010 22:41, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
I'm not even sure what maps as images means. If a map is described in
XML (say, as an svg file), would that file be a map as an image?
Let's assume any of the individually copyrightable graphics (like
On 09/01/2010 10:17 PM, Liz wrote:
1. From where does OSMF get the mandate to choose the licence? OSMF mandate is
to own and run the servers . I got that from the OSMF website.
The OSMF's Memorandum of Association, which is the legal expression of
the Foundation's purpose, states:
3. The
On 2 September 2010 05:14, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
there's hardly a single message of yours in which I fail so find
something inappropriate.
I've made several comments that you do like wise, you keep claiming
this change is needed to make OSM more free, but that's dishonest
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote:
maps are expressly treated as artistic works by s.4(2)(a) of the
Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (to give a UK perspective).
Pretty much the same thing in the US. pictorial, graphic, and
sculptural works are included
On 2 September 2010 03:25, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 6:04 PM, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote:
maps are expressly treated as artistic works by s.4(2)(a) of the
Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (to give a UK perspective).
Pretty much the same thing in the
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 5:59 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Also proceeding is the discussion of exactly what edits should be
treated in what way during the license change[1]. So if you care one
way or the other if a spell-check 'bot that changes tag spelling
should be considered
On Sep 1, 2010, at 9:55 AM, Anthony wrote:
If ODbL were CC-BY-SA for databases, I'd be in favor of it.
+1
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
50 matches
Mail list logo
