On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 5:53 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Frederik Ramm frede...@... writes:
By the way, the database right exists - in certain jurisdictions like
the EU - even if it is not asserted. That means, OSMF is likely to hold
database rights over the database even today. But
Andy Allan writes:
Never mind what Richard says, there's also some other points
1) You can't actually put anything into the public domain in most
jurisdictions. The best you can do yourself is use a special license,
such as CC0, which achieves similar results, but strictly isn't the
same
On 07/25/2010 05:24 PM, Anthony wrote:
So why hasn't OSMF moved OSM to CC-BY-SA 3.0? The upgrade clause
makes that nearly as simple as sed 's/2.0/3.0/g' index.html,
right?
Nearly.
But at least one major contribution to OSM is from a jurisdiction where
the 2.0 licences included the EU DB
On 25 July 2010 18:49, Todd Huffman huffma...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you point me to a reference on this? Ideally there would be a
resource which laid out which jurisdictions one can put something into
public domain.
LMGTFY;
http://www.linuxjournal.com/article/6225
/ Grant
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 4:56 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 07/25/2010 05:24 PM, Anthony wrote:
So why hasn't OSMF moved OSM to CC-BY-SA 3.0? The upgrade clause
makes that nearly as simple as sed 's/2.0/3.0/g' index.html,
right?
Nearly.
But at least one major contribution to
On 07/26/2010 05:30 PM, Anthony wrote:
You said yourself that the database right doesn't have to be asserted.
Yes, I should have said do waive, not don't assert.
No one can assert the database right on a derivative of the OSM
database, because they'd need the permission of the maker of the
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 07/26/2010 05:30 PM, Anthony wrote:
No one can assert the database right on a derivative of the OSM
database, because they'd need the permission of the maker of the
database to do so.
Not if OSM(F) waive their own
On 25/07/10 01:17, Richard Weait wrote:
Sure, they all might the great guys as of now, but suppose OSM becomes
importatnt enough to big players, who says TeleAtlas or Google or someone
won't get say new 1000 members in OSMF and have a strong majority of votes
to pass any such thing? it's not
Hi,
TimSC wrote:
Richard and Frederik observed that a database
right is probably owned by someone and that someone might be (partly)
OSMF.
By the way, the database right exists - in certain jurisdictions like
the EU - even if it is not asserted. That means, OSMF is likely to hold
database
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 9:37 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
Ok. There are two types of rights in OSM in its broadest sense:
a) the rights in the individual contributions
b) the rights in the database as a whole
The user preference refers to (a).
So your choice for a is
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 6:21 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
By the way, the database right exists - in certain jurisdictions like the
EU - even if it is not asserted. That means, OSMF is likely to hold database
rights over the database even today. But CC-BY-SA says nothing about
Can you point me to a reference on this? Ideally there would be a
resource which laid out which jurisdictions one can put something into
public domain.
Thanks,
Never mind what Richard says, there's also some other points
1) You can't actually put anything into the public domain in most
On 25 July 2010 12:21, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
TimSC wrote:
We should also get an official statement from OSMF that they will not
assert their database rights on our contributions.
Of course if OSMF were to say that they don't assert database right on any
contribution made
On Sun, Jul 25, 2010 at 2:50 PM, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.comwrote:
On 25 July 2010 12:21, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
TimSC wrote:
We should also get an official statement from OSMF that they will not
assert their database rights on our contributions.
Of course if
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 07:05:02 -0700 (PDT), Richard Fairhurst
rich...@systemed.net wrote:
TimSC wrote:
In that case, is it legally sound if I download my own contribution
due, to database rights?
Difficult to say - I can see an argument either way. A database right
certainly exists and
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Matija Nalis mnalis-gm...@voyager.hr wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 07:05:02 -0700 (PDT), Richard Fairhurst
rich...@systemed.net wrote:
TimSC wrote:
In that case, is it legally sound if I download my own contribution
due, to database rights?
Difficult to say -
Hi again, legal question this time,
This is mainly aimed at the LWG but others might have a view. I was
wondering, why isn't the PD declaration binding, according to the wiki page?
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_would_I_want_my_contributions_to_be_public_domain
If you declare your
now be distributed as PD or anything else, because there were no rights in
the original contribution and I disclaim any rights from my surveying.
Fun, isn't it?
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-PD-declaration-non-binding
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
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 1:06 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Fun, isn't it?
No, the fun is when you tick that box, then potlatch reads that from
the API and disables the mapnik, opencyclemap and OS Opendata
backgrounds :-)
Cheers,
Andy
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
On 23/07/10 12:39, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
If you could magically get at the PD data without accessing it from the OSM
database (i.e. you asked the user for a local copy that they had saved on
their computer before uploading it to OSM), then the PD declaration on its
own would be sufficient.
22 matches
Mail list logo
