Hi,
James Livingston wrote:
Which brings us on to enforcement - at some point a user is going to use
ODbL licensed data, not comply with the licence, and not respond to
asking nicely. Who is going to sue them to enforce the ODbL and for
what?
I am certainly not going to sue anybody. I
Hi,
Rob Myers wrote:
Rather than naming and shaming, the FSF and the SFLC always work quietly
to get compliance from people who break the GPL. They don't call them
out in public or drag their asses to court to make an example of them.
Legal action and the publicity that brings is a last
Hi,
OdbL has this requirement where, if you publish a produced work
based on a derived database, you also have to publish either
(a) the derived database or
(b) a diff allowing someone to arrive at the derived database if he
has the original, publicly available database or
(c) an algorithm
Hi,
Matt Amos wrote:
let's assume it's known that this company is definitely using OSM data
- determining that can be difficult, depending on exactly what it is
they're doing with the data. in general, it's very difficult to do
anything directly from the planet file alone, so i'd suspect that
Hi,
80n wrote:
I think you've lost the thread. Now, you are arguing that you can't
spot a derivative database.
My original question was aiming at whether or not there are ways to
weasel yourself out of the requirement release derivative databases or
the algorithms leading to them.
I think
Hi,
Anthony wrote:
Where does one draw the line between a Derivative Database, a
Collective Database, and a Produced Work anyway?
Part of the answer is, in almost salomonic fashion, here:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Produced_Work_-_Guideline
There's also tons of
Hi,
David Groom wrote:
From this I infer that, unless a Person is in breach of the Terms of the
licence, we give them the right to access the OSM database under the terms
of the licence as it was at the time they first started to use the database.
I think you are mixing up the terms
Hallo,
Matt Amos wrote:
However, my question is, how far does the share alike
section of the Creative Commons licence go. I want to share the map data
with OSM but not the other sections of the work.
this lack of clarity is one of the problems with the CC BY-SA license.
the short answer
Hi,
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
I'm not particularly au fait with national copyright law in mainland
Europe. Doubtless you can answer on France: I can't see anything in
German law that would give protection.
I have lost thread of what kind of protection exactly you are talking
about, but
Hi,
Matt Amos wrote:
does that mean that no-one can redistribute a screenshot of the
application?
Yes, that's my reading, unless you invoke some superior right to fair
use or citation or whatever applicable in your country; which would
of course make any copyright discussion obsolete. - I
Ed,
I don't quite follow your logic.
You seem to be saying:
1. there is no proof that CC-BY-SA doesn't work;
2. there is danger that anything based on contract law weakens the
protection we have for our data (because breach of contract doesn't give
us a strong handle)
3. you accept that
Hi,
Ed Avis wrote:
if we carry on licensing CC BY-SA we may get to the state where CC
BY-SA is challenged. if the challenge is in the US, i think there's a
good chance of OSMF losing,
Would that be such a disaster? If such a precedent were set, then any
factual data derived from OSM would
Hi,
Andy Allan wrote:
That is, Creative Commons have advised
us, and everyone else, to not use CCBYSA for data. It doesn't come
more plain than that.
I would very much appreciate if *everyone* who invokes Creative Commons
saying that CC-BY-SA is not suitable for data would also add the
Hi,
Ed Avis wrote:
In general, the ideal licence would not need to be fully watertight in
all jurisdictions, but only strong enough to provide a good deterrent
in practice for most individuals and companies.
What would you want to deter them from?
Bye
Frederik
Hi,
Matt Amos wrote:
ODbL does exactly this: it is a copyright and database rights license,
Can you explain this some more. I thought the copyright aspect was
explicitly not covering the content (a fact that was actually critisised
by a legal reviewer who found it too clumsy to have an extra
it, the copyright aspect of ODbL only covers things like
the data structure or schema etc., but not the contents.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk
really flag bot accounts - assuming that
mass-changing something into something-other does not earn you any
copyright *even* if original contributions were copyrightable.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
Hi,
Matt Amos wrote:
this is the crux of the question. the ODbL makes no distinction
between lat/lon data, ID data, or any other sort of data. so the
question then becomes; if i'm using some data from an ODbL database
and incorporating that into my database, do i have to release all of
my
Hi,
Matt Amos wrote:
can the SA requirement be satisfied by saying that we consider the
extracted IDs to be an ODbL part of a collective database, where the
proprietary data is the other part? it would require the ODbL part
(i.e: the list of IDs) to be made available, but nothing else.
It
Hi,
(for those on dev; this started out as a discussion on whether or not we
want to put any legal/license restrictions on external users linking to
OSM objects for identification, e.g. a restaurant guide saying this pub
is OSM node #12345)
Matt Amos wrote:
i would hope so too, as it makes
Hi,
no-one is suggesting that the extraction of names, locations and IDs
would be somehow outside of the ODbL. any site using these as lookup
keys would have to release that data under the ODbL.
[...]
as a concrete example, let's pretend i have a site, beerintheOSM,
which rates pubs and
Richard,
Richard Weait wrote:
Imagine a data provider using perhaps cc-by, or a BSD style permissive
license contributes their data to OSM.
Imagine then that they would like to monitor changes in OSM to data
that originated from their source.
Imagine then that they would like to incorporate
Hi,
Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
Was the answer to my question that nobody knows how long ODbL is protecting
the
data and it is impossible to tell it exactly?
No, I think the answer was forever.
Bye
Frederik
___
legal-talk mailing list
Hi,
James Livingston wrote:
On 30/09/2009, at 7:36 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Question is: 1. what about the contents themselves. Have we reached a
consensus that the contents of the database are themselves not
protected
by copyright and do we explicitly say that we don't claim any
Hi,
tele...@hushmail.com wrote:
My question is what type of attribution is appropriate?
We had a huge discussion about this 2.5 years ago but not a lot has
changed since, so you might want to read the thread with the misleading
subject OSM Layer into Adobe Illustrator,
application displays OSM data
loaded from file 1 and proprietary data loaded from file 2, then you can
keep the licenses separate.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal
Hi,
Gioele wrote:
Instead of choosing between re-licensing to ODbL and having their
contribution removed, they could choose to release their contribution (past
and future) into public domain.
Should we go ahead with the ODbL relicensing - a question that is still
not answered and for which
are
thinking? Is there some lawyer opinion on cases like this documented
somewhere in the vast depths of our Wiki and LWG minutes?
(I'm just trying to determine what exactly ODbL mandates - not trying to
find out what would be desirable in an ideal world.)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede
Hi,
Ed Avis wrote:
Frederik Ramm frede...@... writes:
If it is the settled view of the OSM project, based on legal advice,
that copyright plus CC-BY-SA does not protect the Openstreetmap
geodata from being copied and incorporated into other works, can an
official statement be made
Hi,
Grant Slater wrote:
Quote next section...
If you're under 16:
- Never reveal any personal information about yourself or anyone else
(for example, school, telephone number, your full name, home address
or email address).
Not capturing any personal information from under 13 year olds,
to operate a site that
explicitly invites e.g. Nazi contributions and then play innocent).
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
/Children%27s_Online_Privacy_Protection_Act
Should we perhaps have two sets of Terms and Condition - one that
applies if the user is in the USA, and the other if he isn't? One with
200 lines of text, the other with 10?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09
Hi,
Brendan Barrett wrote:
What happens if someone, with malicious intent, deletes lots of data or
uploads things that cause trouble (e.g. upload Teleatlas data, then tip
off Teleatlas to make trouble). Do we reserve the right to sue them for
damages, and if so, would this agreement be the
Hi,
George Ionescu wrote:
One more quick question, just to be sure: how should we handle
printing media in CC-BY-SA terms?
Is printing ©OpenStreetMap - CC-BY-SA on the map enough to ensure I'm
complying with current OSM license?
If you have enough room then we prefer the URLs for OSM and CC
Hi,
Ed Avis wrote:
Should say: You agree to only add contents for which you are the copyright
holder, *or which are in the public domain*, *or which already have permission
from the rights holder to distribute under Licence X*, or where you have
explicit
permission from the rights holder to
Hi,
Ed Avis wrote:
ODbL, as fast as I understand, does not permit re-licensing, which means
that even if you have other data that is ODbL licensed, you cannot
upload it to OSM without express permission of the license holder.
But if OSM also adoped ODbL then no re-licensing would be
Hi,
Russ Nelson wrote:
I was relying on information in this book. Feel free to disagree with
John Forester (elsewhere), but my point applies to any unlikely event
of bad consequences which can me mitigated at low cost.
At low cost is something that remains to be seen - with the initial
probably find something idiotic in every paragraph if I put my
mind to it but I'd rather do something else.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
not fighting with each other for once?
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,
Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
Facts are Facts and can't be Copyrighted
... which ist not exactly the position that OSM is taking on this
matter; in fact, with ODBL we go to great lengths to ensure that even if
our facts should not be copyrightable we still get to say exactly under
what
a database from a non-database.
Ist that correct?
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
Works cannot be licensed under
ODbL, and if it is a database it *must* be licensed under ODbL). This
means that the choice cannot be deferred until the work is actually
used, doesn't it?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
Hi,
Gervase Markham wrote:
The way of avoiding it seeming to be FUD is to have a clause like:
Nothing in this licence attempts to restrict your rights under fair use
or a similar doctrine.
Sounds like: We have a honest desire to sue the shit out of you if you
violate any of our 52
.
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,
Frederik Ramm wrote:
What I'm concerned with is mainly: How big is the risk of someone
whitewashing our data from the contractual part of the ODbL,
I should have explained: Such whitewashing would require someone to
breach the contract by removing all licensing information
Hi,
Peter Miller wrote:
However if the OSMF can change the license and given that it is a
viral license then surely anyone else can also change the licensing of
any derived database? Our lawyer mentions that the OSMF could 'sell it
of commercial terms' or make it available to a
Hi,
the OSMF LWG recently had a couple of calls with Clark Asay, who has
generously agreed to give OSMF legal advice concerning the new
license. i've attached the write up of the first of the calls
Was that based on the 0.9 or 1.0 license?
I am concerned because of
Q: Is the process of
, and that's it.)
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
of the license that would say as
much. Forks are not supported ;-)
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
proclaim that the BSD style license is compatible with
ODbL. Yay! Where can I sign up ;-)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
Hi,
Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
Thus it would be allowed to to take
less than 100 features or area of less than 1000 inhabitants and make PD,
Share
alike or commercial derivatives from that without any restrictions. Is my
interpretation right?
There's the problem of the reverse-engineering
-license the whole of OSM under ODbL and
CC-BY-SA. Has that been discussed and found to be a good idea?
Or does OSMF not have the intention of declaring CC-BY-SA a compatible
license, and if not, how will CC-BY-SA licensed produced works be made
possible?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm
of 237 tile choices depending on
your request characteristics. Surely my.tel cannot be expected to deal
with this, so in my eyes route-me should make sure that if they hand out
OSM tiles, they also hand out the matching attribution...
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org
,
just peer through the XML with *any* text editor and Ctrl+F)
your raw XML processing capabilites seem to vastly exceed mine ;-)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal
by those who are party to it
before it can be of legal relevance.
(Maybe you're reading this on dev and are unaware of the 1000+ postings
in the previous year on legal-talk about the matter...?)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
Hi,
Mohamad Ali wrote:
1.We develop a tracking system used for GPS devices, so we display the
vehicles on map in real time,..
Can we have your tracks ;-)
My question is : what are the terms and conditions of using ' OpenStreetMap
' for a tracking system?
I mean can we use it for
with interpretation and continuous
development of the license. To my understanding OSMF has not yet
nominated anyone for this job. Any volunteers?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal
Hi,
Russ Nelson wrote:
I don't want a virus, but I like the reciprocal nature of these
licenses.
Reciprocal is not the correct term IMHO. Reciprocal would mean that if
you take our data you will have to give us something in return.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede
an informed
decision, then how can Joe Mapper who hasn't even followed the discussion?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
Hi,
Nick Black wrote:
I've always felt that you were completely aligned behind the aims of OSM -
we can disagree, but at the end of the day we're all here for the same
reason. Right now, its really hard to find anything positive or
constructive in your ongoing bombardment of these lists.
Hi,
Grant Slater wrote:
We're made up of native English and Dutch speakers, we need assistance
from people who speak other languages.
I have already done a lot of translation work into German for the
license process (as have others), and have generally tried to inform the
people on talk-de
Hi,
And therefore, I presume the same is true if the program is a Flash
app (running client-side, of course, albeit with a browser frame
around it) which outputs the result as a PDF - which Fred can then
save to his local hard drive and/or print. Right?
Since you're asking me
of compatible SA licenses for Produced Works.
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
step. So we should perhaps not go over
the top. It is unlikely that we'll ever have a license that works in
North Korea.
Bye
Frederik
[*] (assuming the use-convey blunder is fixed but it if it isn't then
ODbL is unlikely to be used for OSM)
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org
it
is not any better than CC-BY-SA.
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
up; think of publishing
an R rated film under CC-BY-SA where you will be required to add the
restriction to not sell it to under-18s (depending on jurisdiction etc etc).
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
) an OSM dataset licensed
exactly as it is today. Great win!
See also:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Suggested_Changes#Possible_solution_.231:_Explicitly_allow_popular_SA_licenses
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
unfriendly country and
do WTFYW if you're the kind of person so inclined.
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
.
(For the record, even though I run a company that is set to benefit from
OSMF reducing service because this would increase the market for
commercial map data providers, I don't advocate such a move.)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
is perhaps not as concise as you (Steve) would have
liked when you asked for a list to be emailed but I think it is the
best we can do without loss of information.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
mechanism for those that pop up later, rather than rushing through
something where we already have a list of known bugs.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk
manages to strip off the license then all is lost.
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,
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
).
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
(URI) [...] both in the Database [...]
and in any relevant documentation
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
--
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
in
our Wiki but it will be a hell of a lot of work.
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,
Frederik Ramm wrote:
We need to clarify this once and for all: Where exactly in the following
typical rendering chain does the thing cease to be a database in our
definition?
* download (section of) OSM data
* make changes to OSM data
* render OSM data into vector graphics format
--
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
way or another.
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
its essential capability of being accessed as a database.
And the essential capability of database-ness is protected, as Richard
pointed out, even if the data should be conveyed by means of a Produced
Work.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
to be layered
application.
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
independent of the channel through which you
received the original database.
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
vandalism
and abuse and encouraged all to comment.
It would be interesting for us to have access to this document, as the
potential measures against repeated copyright infringement are probably
similar to those against vandalism and abuse.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede
re-license; otherwise they can
always claim they were not clear about what they were signing.)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
draft as published in 2.
6. if vote positive: implement license and ask mappers to sign up
7. if vote negative: back to the drawing board
Is that correct? Mikel?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
) upgrading scheme?
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
for
OSMF business? The advantage would then be that half the board already
know how to use it ;-)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
Hi,
Peter Miller wrote:
I would however suggest that we avoid the
legal details where possible and try to just describe in plain english
what the problem is.
Well - in plain English there is no problem. The questions I am asking
arise from the legal construct! There is no core non-legal
suggest that anyone editing
the page tries the same; If you think my wording is too strong (we must
decide blah blah) then just change it to something better (it would be
prudent to decide blah blah) or put a whole paragraph into perspective
or whatever.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm
I meant with the number 3 in my original post, yes ;-)
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,
80n wrote:
The key phrase is cannot be contacted and the import being that if
they were contactable they would probably agree to the new license. If
they subsequently make contact and don't agree to the new license then
they can legitimately claim that their copyright is being
just people like you and me, and
even though we have talked and thought about the licensing stuff
forever, we manage to come up with new and unprecedented license
questions every other day ;-)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
that
these licenses are somehow all one family until they think about it and
find out that the members of this family don't particularly like each other.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk
the
name.
I would like to hear from the foundation about their concept of
acceptable use of the trademark. Would you, for example, allow
openstreetmapsucks.org and OpenStreetMap Services, Inc.? Who has a
say in the matter?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49
is actually the greatest problem with
the CC licenses and I'm happy not to see it repeated here.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
and publicy displaying these
- as long as you don't distribute or publicly display, the whole section
4 does not apply.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk
your
results here before you give them to the lawyers so that we can point
out possible omissions.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
just achieve this.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
301 - 400 of 449 matches
Mail list logo
