My apologies but the DBL text seems to be mis-formatted -- probably
as a result of my last wordpress update. It should be fixed now, but
just in case the downloads offer the canonical version.
Thanks!
~Jordan
Mr. Jordan S Hatcher, JD, LLM
jordan at opencontentlawyer dot com
OC Blog:
Hi,
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 11:52:24AM +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Let us drop all this nonsense and concentrate on drawing up the moral
guidelines - saying what we consider ok and what not - instead of
fantasizing about having legal powers to enforce anything.
I don't get it : you go on
Jordan S Hatcher wrote:
I'd like to note that, just to clarify, factual data is generally not
copyrightable, and so there would be nothing to assign.
Why is it that we are assuming (and I'm not just saying this to Jordan)
that the individual nodes and ways in OSM are factual data? I don't
Frederik Ramm wrote:
If the contract is between OSM and the user, then Foo cannot sue Bar
for breach of contract because they have no contract. (Can my
business sue your business because you use a pirated copy of
Microsoft Windows and thus have an unfair advantage? Unsure but don't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gervase Markham wrote:
| Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:
| Long term, we can avoid the ambiguity by making it clear that all data
| belongs to OSM, whoever that is (probably the foundation), then we can
| let the foundation change the license whenever
