On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 09:37:14 +0200
Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I don't know how long you have been following the process, but the
vote is long past. Members of the OSMF have had such a vote last year
and agreed to go ahead with the new license. The switch to ODbL is
already
On Fri, 01 Oct 2010 11:01:12 +0100
Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 10/01/2010 10:38 AM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
I ask once more
from where did OSMF get a mandate to change the licence?
The vote.
OSMF is a small set of persons and is not representative of OSM as a
community
On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 03:57:44 -0700 (PDT)
Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
I ask once more
from where did OSMF get a mandate to change the licence?
It doesn't. That's why it's asking the rights-holders to change the
licence for the data which they've contributed[1].
I agree
On Fri, 1 Oct 2010 05:43:31 -0700 (PDT)
Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
I realise Liz has already posted elsewhere that
she's aiming to be disruptive, but I hadn't realised that it was some
form of sub-4chan concerted trolling expedition.
As the choices offered by some people
This belongs back on talk
with a new header.
OSM states that it is a free map, free to edit and free to use
Whether the database should contain imported stuff, traced stuff, or
only personally surveyed stuff is a very big issue and any intent now
to alter the basic rules of inputting should be
On Mon, 20 Sep 2010 18:10:59 -0400
Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
CTs are per account. Active Contributors are per person.
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms_FAQ
a last minute explanatory add-on
initially CTs were per person
now the rules slide and change
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, Tom Hughes wrote:
Yes, the council will be sending the data they create describing the
routes of paths to the OS but they will also be using OS data when
creating that description - if a path goes from the junction of two
roads to the corner of a field then they will
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009, Vincent MEURISSE wrote:
If you really need such a tool, copy the software used by openstreetbug,
put it on your server and then you can have annotations on the map.
thanks Vincent
that could well be a workable solution
___
On Fri, 3 Jul 2009, Ulf Möller wrote:
It doesn't. It's just that during a review of the proposed license, a
lawyer pointed out that it is good practice to have terms of use for the
website. That recommendation would still stand if we chose not to change
the license.
I can't really comprehend
On Fri, 3 Jul 2009, Francis Davey wrote:
Put the lawyer back in the cage.
Be nice 8-). This isn't (as far as I can see) about lawyers being
unreasonable.
I just get the impression that some people have had so much to do with lawyers
while trying to get the database licence organised that
On Fri, 26 Jun 2009, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Do you wear a helmet when you ride a bicycle? Accidents resulting
in TBI are very uncommon, but their consequences are very high
and a helmet will protect you from many of those consequences.
Fantastic. We have now found the one OSM-related
On Sun, 14 Jun 2009, Jochen Topf wrote:
On Sun, Jun 14, 2009 at 08:13:41PM +1200, Andrew Simpson wrote:
The licence is Creative Commons 3.0 and is clearly shown on the web
page. There is no mention of 'what' and 'how' the required credit
should be attributed.
And on the same web page it
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
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
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, SteveC wrote:
I could in theory make it, and I even considered it for about 10
seconds... but I couldn't think what I'd get out of it other than
frustration.
DRM for maps, sorry GeoDRM... what can you say but FAIL ?
Best
Steve
Trouble is, these people continue
14 matches
Mail list logo
