If you cc0 your work anyone can relicence it.
So do that and then contribute it under the cts and there isn't a problem.
--
Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de wrote:
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 07:49:18AM +0200, Michael Kugelmann wrote:
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 04:45:41PM -0400, Anthony wrote:
So what's the problem? You don't want to grant OSMF the right to
relicense. OSMF doesn't want your edits without the right to
relicense them.
Why do you want to force your edits, *which they don't want*, upon them?
I have a problem
On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 05:06:48PM -0400, Anthony wrote:
Could they do things another way? Sure, they could. But they've
chosen not to. If you don't like it, don't contribute.
I have contributed a lot for nearly 3 years and now i am blocked out
so i am not contributing anymore and i ceased
On 15/08/11 22:16, Florian Lohoff wrote:
I have contributed a lot for nearly 3 years and now i am blocked out
so i am not contributing anymore and i ceased all my OSM work already.
Since your contributions are PD and therefore CT compatible I don't
understand what the problem is.
- Rob.
Nobody has claimed that everything leading up to the license changed was
handled perfectly, with hindsight I would suspect that a couple of
things would
have been handled differently by everybody involved.
But I have not seen anything that would indicate that the outcome of
any such better
Op 12-08-11 23:34, Nic Roets schreef:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 10:47 PM, Michael Kugelmannmichaelk_...@gmx.de wrote:
May I remind you a litte bit on the history of the licence change... (all as
far as I know)
While the first SOTM at Manchester (July 2007) there was a pannel about the
license.
Hi Henk,
[Henk Hoff, 14.08.2011, 14:25]:
If you talk about future license changes as defined in the CT: active
contributors are defined as contributors who have edited the map in at
least 3 different months (don't have to be consecutively) in the
previous year.
Exactly. So someone who has
[Henk Hoff, 14.08.2011, 19:00]:
If contributing in 3 different months during the last year would be too much
of a burden, are you then really involved?
If the sysadmins block your account because they want to force through a
future CT update that you deem problematic, then it is simply not
On 14/08/11 18:14, Olaf Schmidt-Wischhöfer wrote:
If the sysadmins block your account
The sysadmins have not blocked your account.
The system has been changed to implement the licence changeover plan.
You may not like the plan, but neither its form nor the effects of its
implementation are
Op 14-08-11 19:14, Olaf Schmidt-Wischhöfer schreef:
[Henk Hoff, 14.08.2011, 19:00]:
If contributing in 3 different months during the last year would be too much
of a burden, are you then really involved?
If the sysadmins block your account because they want to force through a
future CT update
On 14 August 2011 22:39, Henk Hoff o...@toffehoff.nl wrote:
Op 12-08-11 23:34, Nic Roets schreef:
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 10:47 PM, Michael Kugelmannmichaelk_...@gmx.de
wrote:
While the first SOTM at Manchester (July 2007) there was a pannel about
the
license. BTW:
So, did the panel
on 12.08.2011 23:34, Nic Roets wrote:
If the OSMF wanted to hear all the
different opinions on the license, they would not have formed the LWG,
because legal-talk is a reasonable aggregation point for that.
There are a lot of different ways to discuss these days. A mailing list
is one way. But
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 08:59:30PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote:
Guess what - I dont trust the OSMF - In the past the OSMF has decided
to relicense, decided to use the ODBL and decided upon the CT.
In no way the contributers have been asked - the people who actually did
the work.
So why
[Robert Kaiser, 11.08.2011, 21:17]:
Most of us always agreed that our data is the data of the OSM project as
soon as we contributed it, and that the project will always be able to use
it. Some disagree apparently and make the life of the project much harder.
Unfortunately it is not „the OSM
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 09:50:40AM +0200, Simon Poole wrote:
Olaf
What you are suggesting would have amounted to allowing every single
pre-CT mapper
a veto on the license change process. With something around 300'000
pre-CT mappers,
this is obviously not just not practical, it is simply
[Simon Poole, 12.08.2011, 11:29]:
Your changes, as has been pointed out to you before, wouldn't have been
backwards compatible with the initial CTs.
And in reply, I pointed out how this problem could be solved.
Just for the record: Both the wording of the CT and the behaviour of the
Robert Kaiser kairo@... writes:
Well, IIRC that's exactly one of the points of the CTs, granting the
OSMF the right to allow exemptions in some cases.
Although the OSMF is sub-licensing the map and so could sub-license under any
terms (including 'ODbL with the following list of
Olaf Schmidt-Wischhöfer schrieb:
[Robert Kaiser, 11.08.2011, 21:17]:
Most of us always agreed that our data is the data of the OSM project as
soon as we contributed it, and that the project will always be able to use
it. Some disagree apparently and make the life of the project much harder.
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 4:46 PM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
And as for the OSMF, I cite www.osmfoundation.org with The OpenStreetMap
Foundation is an international not-for-profit organization supporting, but
not controlling, the OpenStreetMap Project. It is dedicated to encouraging
On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 10:47 PM, Michael Kugelmann michaelk_...@gmx.de wrote:
On 12.08.2011 11:46, Florian Lohoff wrote:
Up to now the pre-CT mappers have not even asked if a license change
should happen at all, and WHICH license be switched to.
May I remind you a litte bit on the history
On 12.08.2011 11:46, Florian Lohoff wrote:
[]
BTW: looking on your wiki page you declare:
=
All my contributions to OpenStreetMap are released into the public
domain http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/public_domain. This applies worldwide.
In case this is not
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 05:07:15PM +0200, Robert Kaiser wrote:
If all your contributions can be considered CC0/PD, then you grant
all right to everybody who wants to use the data, so your statements
are definitely in conflict with themselves. Nobody in our friendly
OSM community can help your
?
The OSMF is preparing actions ? What actions ? That is an empty phrase
(peptalk).
Regards,
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Henk Hoff [mailto:o...@toffehoff.nl]
Verzonden: Thursday, August 11, 2011 1:51 AM
Aan: Licensing and other legal discussions.
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my
Am 11.08.2011 09:38, schrieb ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen:
...
It's the necessity of a license that has never been discussed about.
The need for a license has always been granted, and the discussion
only is about what license.
A license is necessary because we legally need to
...@poole.ch]
Verzonden: Thursday, August 11, 2011 9:57 AM
Aan: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Am 11.08.2011 09:38, schrieb ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen:
...
It's the necessity of a license that has never been discussed about
...@poole.ch]
Verzonden: Thursday, August 11, 2011 12:42 PM
Aan: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Am 11.08.2011 12:00, schrieb ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
Gremmen:
Thanks Simon for your constructive reply.
(contrary to those that call any
ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen schrieb:
So by citing my e-mail without a license, you
made an infraction to my copyright,as you are actually
republishing copyrighted work
No, only if it wasn't properly cited, as (AFAIK) most IP laws require
you to point out who is the author
On 11/08/11 16:20, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen wrote:
I see no difference in re-publishing text, as in our email lists
and the database, properly citing Google as source.
You are correct. Both are breaches of copyright where it applies.
There are two important differences
Ed Avis schrieb:
The CC-BY-SA licence does seem to be a lot more straightforward than the
ODbL/DbCL combination.
As I understand it, that's because any current CC-BY-SA license does not
really cover databases as described by database laws in some
jurisdictions, and neither collections of
Hi,
On 09.08.2011 22:43, 80n wrote:
Expecting the crowd to go and re-map stuff wholesale,
for somebody else's benefit is just absurd, it's never going to happen.
You're wrong with this. At least in the country I'm most active the
transition to ODbL ready data is making huge progress. And
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Stephan Knauss o...@stephans-server.dewrote:
Hi,
On 09.08.2011 22:43, 80n wrote:
Expecting the crowd to go and re-map stuff wholesale,
for somebody else's benefit is just absurd, it's never going to happen.
You're wrong with this. At least in the country
Hi,
On 08/10/11 08:38, Stephan Knauss wrote:
You're wrong with this. At least in the country I'm most active the
transition to ODbL ready data is making huge progress. And it's not
someone else's benefit, but a benefit for the whole community.
I, too, am positively surprised by the speed and
@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Hi,
On 08/10/11 08:38, Stephan Knauss wrote:
You're wrong with this. At least in the country I'm most active the
transition to ODbL ready data is making huge progress. And it's not
someone else's benefit, but a benefit
It's not just remapping that effects this, we are still seeing between
60-100 pre-CTs signups
accepting the CTs per day without any indication of this slowing down.
I expect a couple of 10'000 more before we actually relicense.
Simon
Am 10.08.2011 09:16, schrieb 80n:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at
as PD user with a very simple PD-CT.
Gert
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Frederik Ramm [mailto:frede...@remote.org]
Verzonden: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 9:15 AM
Aan: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Hi,
On 08/10/11 08:38, Stephan
Am 10.08.2011 11:29, schrieb Nic Roets:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:50 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
Gremmeng.grem...@cetest.nl wrote:
PD data does not need a
complicated and binding CT as the current one.
True. But PD is forward compatible with the CTs. For example, we did
not need
@openstreetmap.org
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] I want my access back
Am 10.08.2011 11:29, schrieb Nic Roets:
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:50 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
Gremmeng.grem...@cetest.nl wrote:
PD data does not need a
complicated and binding CT as the current one.
True. But PD
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
On 08/10/11 08:38, Stephan Knauss wrote:
You're wrong with this. At least in the country I'm most active the
transition to ODbL ready data is making huge progress. And it's not
someone else's benefit, but a
Florian Lohoff schrieb:
More interestingly - Why on earth cant i contribute although i stated that
all my contributions can be considered CC0/Public Domain? Why do i need
to accept the CT, granting some spooky special rights to some folks
i dont know and who definitly not act in my name.
If
Hi,
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 05:07:15PM +0200, Robert Kaiser wrote:
Florian Lohoff schrieb:
More interestingly - Why on earth cant i contribute although i stated that
all my contributions can be considered CC0/Public Domain? Why do i need
to accept the CT, granting some spooky special rights
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de wrote:
Guess what - I dont trust the OSMF - In the past the OSMF has decided
+1
But when you contribute under an open license, you must make peace
that some downstream users will use it in some unintended ways. For
example the spirit of
Gert Gremmen wrote:
OSM promised me that my contributions to be removed in the process
to OdBL. That did not happen.
Nor has a OdBL version of the OSM database been launched.
Did you ever try to understand anything about the licence change at all?
Did you read about the process e.g. in
Op 10-08-11 12:33, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen schreef:
To all
It's all a matter of trust.
A) Trusting contributors and
b) trusting the users of OSM data.
The current policy of OSM is to trust nobody,
and therefore OSM(F) is seeking legal certainty,
by creating licenses and
Am 11.08.2011 01:50, schrieb Henk Hoff:
...
Just for fun: try reading the Terms of Service of Google, to which you
agree every time you use one of its services.
I normally refer to
http://wikimapia.org/terms_reference.html
for ToS for something similar to OSM.
Simon
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 7:53 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote:
OSM is still CC-BY-SA and it seems that that won’t change soon.
**
Gert, if you are so sure of that, open a new account and use that instead.
At the very least you will still be
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 08:03:16PM +0200, Nic Roets wrote:
Gert, if you are so sure of that, open a new account and use that instead.
At the very least you will still be contributing to osm and any forks that
may occur.
He said
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 08:58:03PM +0200, Nic Roets wrote:
The precise statement of that will be interesting. What if you
personally accept the CTs but imported CC-BY-SA material in your old
account ?
IANAL but my guess is that you might decide on every individual contribution
how to
Me too, I would like to fix some bugs, why am I locked out?
mike
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Florian Lohoff f...@zz.de wrote:
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 08:03:16PM +0200, Nic Roets wrote:
Gert, if you are so sure of that, open a new account and use that
instead.
At the very least you will
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 6:53 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote:
As I do not agree with the CT and did not click
the right checkbox, I have been blocked contributing access.
** **
OSM promised me that my contributions to be removed in the
Mike, Florian, Gert,
if you want to make edits and are uncomfortable with putting your
old edits under the Contributor Terms, you can create a new account and
make edits with that. This will *not* have any influence on the data you
contributed with your old account; only your new edits
Hi,
Frederik Ramm wrote:
Gert, you seem to be under the impression that the license change
process has somehow failed just because we're still handing out the
planet under CC-BY-SA. But you are wrong; this has always been the case.
Maybe that too, but I meant to write this has always been
51 matches
Mail list logo
