Am 28.01.2012 08:47, schrieb Mike Dupont:
then I determined that I will not be able to accept the terms because
someone, who is a Hasardeur in my humble opinion, decided to break
compatiblity with the existing license and then, break from the idea
that I own my data and ask me to hand over
Am 08.06.2011 18:59, schrieb Olaf Schmidt-Wischhöfer:
Hi Grant,
thanks for assuring me that the sysadmins have no interest in participating
in
behaviour that is harmful to the community.
Does this mean that I will not be chucked out of the community by the
sysadmins?
I am willing
Am 30.08.2010 13:43, schrieb John Smith:
2010/8/30 Dirk-Lüder Kreie osm-l...@deelkar.net:
data will not be available under ODbL temporarily. I'm very sure it will
be re-mapped, probably within less than a year.
I disagree, especially without access to some of the existing data
sources
Am 31.08.2010 06:36, schrieb Anthony:
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 6:12 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
You are still assuming that copyright is universally valid despite court
cases that demonstrate that it isn't.
What does that mean? Copyright is not universally valid? Even Iraq
has
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 for March 08 and see the
discussion over the LINZ
Am 31.08.2010 12:56, schrieb Liz:
On Tue, 31 Aug 2010, Dirk-Lüder Kreie wrote:
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
Am 29.08.2010 11:10, schrieb jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com:
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 10:59 AM, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote:
yes, i think i see what you are saying:
the license will be the only protection against third party abuse.
I think that copyleft is good enough.
I believe
Am 30.08.2010 12:16, schrieb John Smith:
On 30 August 2010 20:12, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
No, this is about caring about the stated aims of the project rather than
fetishising a licence that is not even recommended for use on data by its
own authors.
I care less about the license
