Hi,
On 11/18/10 14:47, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
(I believe that the reasonably calculated in 4.3 imposes a downstream
requirement as part of this: in other words, you must require that
attribution is preserved for adaptations of the Produced Work, otherwise you
have not reasonably calculated
is protected by database
right once again and you need a license to use it.
Otherwise, only the most obscure works (certainly not a printed map)
could fall under the Produced Works rule.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
Hi,
On 11/17/10 10:46, ke...@cordina.org.uk wrote:
Looking at this the eyes or a data-holder, say the OS, who is
considering allowing data to be used this would be a big concern as
the term means they would lose control over how their data is
licensed.
No, the data contributed to OSM can
that an upgrade along that path would be possible with a lot less
eyes watching than an upgrade under the upgrade per clause 3 of the CT!
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
Vision. when they
popped up here to discuss probably didn't help).
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo
in the
first place.
It was Creative Commons who started the process of looking for a license
that led to ODbL. It's just that Creative Commons left that process
along the way.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
Hi,
On 11/17/10 04:26, Anthony wrote:
They left what process? The goal of the process was not to find a
license like the ODbL. The goal of the process was to address the sui
generis database right within the CC framework.
This is not a contradiction. The ODbL could well have been the way to
that database would force you
to release the whole database under ODbL which would violate the terms
of CC-BY-SA.
There are ways in which data could legally be combined but that's really
going too much into detail for talk.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09
banner we're showing and personally I believe the only way to pull
this through is indeed to make it very clear that we're committed to
making the license change, rather than dithering around (a point on
which, astonishingly, 80n seems to be on our side).
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail
to share
the database that contains your picture IDs keyed against locations in
the ODbL case since it could be argued that that database is derived
from OSM and publicly used in your service.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
completely different!
Thus, no problems with CC0, WTFPL etc. on that side.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org
Hi,
Richard Weait wrote:
Is there some OSM contribution or edit that is so mechanical and/or so
insignificant that it need never be considered for copyright or
database right?
Any edit made by a robot - e.g. one that fixes spelling mistakes -
certainly qualifies for never be considered for
then they don't suddenly become copyrighted - or maybe they do, but then
it's your copyright and not that of the original contributors (think of
tearing a magazine to shreds and then gluing together a nice picture
from the coloured pieces of paper).
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede
this not mean that we'd have to remove their contribution from OSM
immediately because the required permissions for re-use/distribution
have not been granted?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal
that the
intersection of both would always be B.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Hi,
On 10/03/2010 04:31 AM, John Smith wrote:
None of those examples applies since it was a question about copyright
ownership.
I don't see why we should treat a nation state's laws about copyright
any different than a nation state's idiosyncratic laws about maps or
surveying. If you are in
Kevin,
ke...@cordina.org.uk wrote:
(b) that there is a very clear (and legally sound) description of the
effect of the new licence when the time comes to vote so we can make
an informed decision which way to vote based on the effect it will
have.
I don't know how long you have been following
Hi,
Kevin Cordina wrote:
What's important is that the licence choice be not used as a stick to enforce
a particular policy about data imports or other aspects of mapping.
And vice versa. I want to import dataset and that's why we cannot use
license is tail-wagging-dog as well.
Bye
Frederik
the risk of sidelining OSM in the long run, or such. We already have
some data that is not compatible with license is not one of them.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
for our data.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
with the
author of the complex program, or is actually pushing the button on the
software in this case non-trivial enough to warrant copyright?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal
to agree to the contributor terms.
Indeed; the publisher could even be completely oblivious of them.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
/Produced_Work_-_Guideline.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
not become
*impossible* with the CTs as they are suggested - they just require OSMF
approval. So the question is not put very well.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
loopholes because even if you took the full DB and put
the PostGIS dump on a CD declaring it a Produced Work, someone who used
it would fall under the reverse engineering clause.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
? Is the OSMF board
the ultimate arbiter? Can the definition be changed to be clearer?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org
in strength.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
and some are not necessary but prudent,
among them the much-discussed clause 3; 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.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org
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
the impression that he is fighting for a principle, and I respect that.
You, JohnSmith, are fighting for yourself, your data, and your applause
from your audience.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
of the contributor terms!).
I think that most people would say that's a feature, not a problem.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
think that there is data in OSM that is so precious that we need
to risk OSM's future just to be able to hold on to that data.
Anyway I hear there's an excellent group of people planning a
continuity fork so any data OSM cannot continue to use would be safe
with them.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik
Hi,
Kevin Peat wrote:
Well I think someone wanting a PD project would need to start from
scratch anyway as it would be hard for them to demonstrate that any
existing data wasn't encumbered with other licenses given the wide use
of imports and tracing in lots of countries.
I think so too,
Hi,
Simon Biber wrote:
I and many others need a firm commitment to ensure contributions continue to be
protected by attribution and share-alike in the future.
-1
(I mean, you may need that but you shouldn't get it. As an aside I
also want to point out that the use of continue to be
, say, CC-BY-SA have already
been done but as you correctly say, these can become a liability later.
It will almost certainly (IANABM, IANALWGM) not be considered for future
imports.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
I ever sought one)...
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Anthony,
Anthony wrote:
I think that the people count more than the data they contribute.
That's a good statement. I'm happy that you have finally come to
understand what this project is about! I was beginning to think you
might just be here for the fun of the argument, whatever argument it
Andrzej,
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
So 300 mappers' work is not something we should make a fuss about?
Let's put it this way:
If 300 mappers are enough to put in a veto against the CT or the license
change then we can stop right now, because I am pretty sure that
*whatever* you do (even if
Hi,
John Smith wrote:
In my eyes the ODbL and CT are part and parcel and I refer to both as the
license change. I don't think that you can separate them.
Is that because you don't think people will swallow the CTs unless
they are a package deal?
No, my statement above is not politically or
Hi,
Francis Davey wrote:
Has anyone given much thought to how this works for the sui generis
database right of the European Union?
Certainly the EU hasn't, the whole database right is written for a world
where company X pays employees to gather data.
I am wondering (as others have
Hi,
John Smith wrote:
(Not, of course, this particular version of the CT, if that's what you're
Exactly... you are trying to sell us a particular happy meal that
isn't making us happy...
us being...?
And I'm not trying to sell anything. If you agree that some for of CT is
required, and
Hi,
Emilie Laffray wrote:
While I am not a legal expert, I will try to answer that one.
Companies can already make money from OpenStreetMap: there are plenty of
examples around (Skobbler, Cloudmade, Geofabrik, etc). There is
nothing preventing a company from using the data. However, they
(moving this thread to legal-talk)
Valent:
AFAIK with new Contributor Terms [1] all data entered into OSM can be
taken by some company, closed and they could create a product made
profit on it.
Grant:
No, they have to make the data available. The data is share-alike.
think any of them have restricted their editing to PD
sources exclusively.
So it seems editors will need to keep track of background image licenses
anyway and with what they are compatible in order to warn or prevent the
user in an adequate way.
No, I don't think so.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik
because even though this posting does not
deal with anything legal, I have a hunch that follow-ups will.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
email but is
completely separate. Any license decision you make on one account will
not influence the other.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Hi,
David Groom wrote:
However from a legal point of view the CT terms say is is an agreement
between you and OSMF.
Interesting, and probably true. But since making the second account
forces you to use a different email address, how will we ever know with
certainty that you and you are the
Anthony,
Anthony wrote:
I don't trust the OSMF to properly remove
all of my work and derivatives of my work if/when they stop releasing
those derivatives under CC-BY-SA.
In December last year we had a guy also called Anthony on legal-talk who
said:
I live in the United States, where
of their data.
If it later turns out they lied, or were certifiably insane at the time
they made the statement, I can always remove it again.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk
Russ,
On 08/08/2010 06:34 AM, Russ Nelson wrote:
Here are the
questions we arrived at (thanks to Skud aka Kirrily Robert for taking
notes):
Good observations. Might be worth to discuss with folks at
odc-disc...@lists.okfn.org as well. I'll forward your post there for
people to be aware of
Hi,
On 08/08/2010 09:25 AM, John Smith wrote:
On 8 August 2010 17:03, Russ Nelsonnel...@crynwr.com wrote:
copyright on it and claim it as their own. Because the ODbL and
CC-By-SA impose a cost on the community. I mean, if we're going to
get rid of contributors on purpose, then at least
Liz,
On 08/08/2010 10:21 AM, Liz wrote:
You are welcome to join a 48,000 km kayak trip to survey the Australian
coastline.
I'll completely replace it with the PD PGS shoreline if anyone ever
again says we cannot do X because of the imported Australian shoreline.
Honestly, I will.
Bye
(and is documented in the
implementation plan on the wiki) that immediately before changeover, a
last cc-by-sa planet including full history will be made available.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
absurd, and you're making a clown of yourself by repeating your
question every two days.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
Hi,
80n wrote:
Does anyone know whether the code exists to do this yet?
I doubt it.
How are way splits handled (only one half of the way will have a full
history)?
I think they can be auto-detected (i.e. where in one changeset, one way
suddenly loses some nodes and another springs up
Hi,
John Smith wrote:
Any such mechanism, in my eyes, need not be 100% perfect; it is sufficient
to make a honest attempt at doing the right thing, and if a few things slip
through, then fix them in case of complaints.
Which goes against the usual OSM policy of rejecting it if unsure,
rather
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Hi,
Heiko Jacobs wrote:
Rob Myers schrieb:
Creative Commons did put a mechanism in place with BY-SA 3.0 to
declare other licences compatible with BY-SA and allow derivatives
to be relicenced under them. But they haven't declared any compatible
yet.
So updating our 2.0 to 3.0 and then
if it is possible legally though, because the very nature of
database right is to protect the whole database - once you deal with
database right you don't deal with individual contributions or data
items any more.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09
the software under another license. Often there won't even be a separate
download link.
It is perfectly sufficient if someone agrees to ODbL, we can then take
his data from our existing database.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
Tim,
TimSC wrote:
I don't get that impression when I read the wiki. It says it is only a
statement and making this statement does not change what people can
do with your data. Looking at the wiki, those lines were written by
Frederik Ramm. I guess I'll ask him what he intended.
I would very
Hi,
Andy Allan wrote:
3) I can consider my edits public domain to my heart's content, but
if they are based on other people's non-PD edits, then they aren't
going to be fully PD.
I think in the wake of the license change we will have to develop a
number of very interesting metrics telling us
wouldn't ask for more at this time.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
legal - not legal
specifically for OSM and only if the license is X.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo
publish the tiles.
Right?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
John,
John Smith wrote:
You are correct, it's obvious that there is some people unhappy with
the status quo.
I wouldn't exactly say I am unhappy with the status quo. It's like
living in a house where experts say it is going to fall apart any minute
- you might like to be able to retain the
Hi,
Liz wrote:
And the arrangement was that
whether the licence change went ahead or not
depended on how many people agreed to relicense their data
Firstly, if anyone ever said how many people then that was a mistake,
because the number of people is of little interest, it is the amount of
Hi,
Oliver (skobbler) wrote:
Sure, any Derivative Database that is made available to a 3rd party falls
under the share-alike. No doubt about that. This handled in section 4.4. The
exceptions are handled in the following section 4.5.
In case of your Produced Work, you make the Produced Work
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Hi,
Frederik Ramm wrote:
lulu-...@gmx.de wrote:
As the topic of the map is discussed controversely, vandalism is
likely to happen, I am afraid.
If the user attempts to use OSM as a vehicle to further his own side in
whatever controversy you are alluding to, risking to bring lots of
vandals
another article is referenced:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2007-March/000179.html
however if you click on the link you are led to a completely different
article than the one the link was pointing to originally!
Can it be fixed?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail
the community will oust you.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
of
recording stuff around us somehow entitles us to dictate our terms and
conditions to others. Just like you think that it is of course all
yours if you design a good map from OSM data, OSMers assert that it is
all theirs. I find both positions morally questionable.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik
is really not the right license for
OSM.
CC is not the right license for OSM, but not for any of the reasons you
have mentioned.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal
. Is that
allowed?) with something other than Dunno, ask a lawyer, and we might
still sue you later.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
illustrated here:
http://cdn-www.cracked.com/articleimages/ob/piratebay_header.jpg
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org
, and you then
violate his license by simply taking the stuff and distributing it
CC-BY-SA, can he sue you? Can you be jailed for stealing from a thief?
Probably depends on jurisdiction.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
it would
have been best if the book had been printed with proper attribution and
license, which the next edition will no doubt be.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk
to support them.
There seem to be some areas where it works, but I have the impression
that triumphantly adding a 23rd language to some page on the Wiki does
not, overall, improve quality.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
Erik,
Erik Johansson wrote:
Obviously a lot of people think Openstreetmap is more than just a
collection of coordinates in a db. I think you try to redefine it in a
way that supports your PD argument.
Firstly, I am not making a PD argument but an ODbL argument here.
Secondly, I'm not
Ævar,
Pretty much they only thing I've ever gotten out of OSM personally
(besides exercise and being able to use it on my GPS) is being able to
use the various map renderings by ITO World, CloudMade etc. under the
same free license as the data.
That may well be; but OSM is not, in its core,
are you enforcing terms you don't agree with? lol. Ok, so people
might not respect a license that you don't agree with, but why care
about fair play when the rules are wrong?
I'm German.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
Hi,
M?rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
do we really want to require the 38th party down the line to still
attribute OSM no matter how diluted the OSM content has become?
yes. Why should it have become diluted?
The very nature of a produced work is to dilute OSM content because
otherwise it would
Hi,
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 19:43, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I am not bothered about individual contributions because everyone who
contributes *knows* what OSM is like and that he cannot expect to get
personal attribution. If someone however has
should be able to learn much more from that than from
just decompiling the IMG file!
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
don't manage to
override that definition with a community norm, then one of the most
promising aspects of ODbL, namely making it easier to deal with maps
produced from our data, becomes void.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
with data licensed
under another license).
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
but the root of the right remains with the
natural person).
So that would make sense.
On the other hand, database rights can, and usually are, accrued by
corporations and not individuals...
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
Jonas,
Jonas Stein wrote:
On the webpage there is still no change. What did they say?
There is a suggested process for dealing with such cases on
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution
This process does not involve reminding the legal-talk list every two
weeks about
that copyright doesn't apply - which
of my rights would you have violated, or which contract broken?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
Hi,
Stefan Neufeind wrote:
Hmm, so actually we'd need some volunteers on a toilet trip to go there,
check the toilet details and map it from their own site-survey.
I'm sure the .au community can provide interesting foodstuffs to further
that objective!
Bye
Frederik
Hi,
Jean-Guilhem Cailton wrote:
Ok, but please do not forget that in crisis situations (e.g. Haiti),
there could be people dying while the deliberation would be taking
place...
This is something to be discussed later, I guess, but my take is that we
should separate crisis stuff from the
Jonas,
Jonas Stein wrote:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Wandertafel
has the wrong license information been fixed already?
Those who know don't read this list. Those who read this list mostly
don't read German. A posting to talk-de would probably return more results!
Bye
Frederik
Hi,
SteveC wrote:
then we also need a NC version.
NC licenses are not compatible with OKFN's own definition of Open
Knowledge, Paragraph 8:
(quote)
8. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor
The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the work in a
specific field of
Hi,
Simon Ward wrote:
On Wed, Jan 06, 2010 at 02:44:53AM +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Unless you're willing sign something that says I agree that OSMF will
make two attempts to contact me at my registered e-mail address with
information on how to vote on an upcoming license change suggestion
registered e-mail address with
information on how to vote on an upcoming license change suggestion, and
if I don't react then that counts as an abstain vote.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
to sublicense.
That makes this recent article by Michael Meeks
on copyright assignment in free software very relevant:
If the article is only relevant to copyright assignment situations, then
I don't think it is relevant for us.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org
Hi,
Anthony wrote:
Where is the actual legal phrasing of this license to sublicense?
In the paragraph just below the actual legal phrasing of the copyright
assignment!
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
201 - 300 of 449 matches
Mail list logo
