Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Missing Openaerial map from Potlatch

2008-05-22 Thread Richard Fairhurst
[cc:ed to legal-talk] Andy Allan wrote: That's pretty clear cut - i-Cubed own copyright over the imagery, and haven't given anyone any rights to do stuff with them - unless they explicitly say otherwise. Public Domain isn't viral for derived works. Probably the biggest thing I've learned

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Missing Openaerial map from Potlatch

2008-05-22 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Steve Hill wrote: Aren't OSM's GPS traces considered CC-BY-SA as well? I haven't seen anything specifically licensing them, but they are in the OSM database, accessible via the OSM API so I err on the side of assuming the CC-BY-SA licence applies to them too. They're not explicitly licensed

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Missing Openaerial map from Potlatch

2008-05-22 Thread Frederik Ramm
Hi, Probably the biggest thing I've learned about copyright since getting involved with OSM is how easy it is to overstate your rights as copyright holder. Most do it because they don't know better. (Some don't even write the name Microsoft in a public article because tehy somehow think