Russ Nelson writes:
I just want to map;
And as RichardF pointed out on IRC, if that's REALLY what I want, then
I ought to STFU, and leave the worrying to other people since I have
enough things to worry about, like whether my local 6 to the pixel
imagery is good enough (eat my dust!), I'm going
Frederik Ramm writes:
On 05/05/11 06:27, Russ Nelson wrote:
I'm wondering on what data you come to that conclusion? Because people
have clicked ok on the license change and CTs? And yet there is no
agreement and no contract. The OSMF has made it clear: you agree, or
we delete your
Richard Masoner writes:
I asked Rails to Trails about licensing their data to OSM and they say
they've been thinking about it and asked me to put them in touch with
somebody official at OSM. They also indicated they would like some kind
of attribution where their data is used.
Dave F. writes:
On 06/12/2010 09:55, Frederik Ramm wrote:
The situation is sufficient for me to use Bing imagery for tracing.
I'm not looking at the legal side of it, I'm just looking at the size
of the PR disaster should Microsoft attempt to backtrack in any way.
PR is more
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
SteveC writes:
As in, why is the PD camp so loud here?
First and foremost, because we believe that all the licensing
kerfluffle will frighten people away from using the map. Because we
all want a map that will actually be USED by the most people possible.
Because we aren't afraid of forks
modifications for our (OSI) trademark (the
green keyhole). I expect that the OSMF would get the same permission.
--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog -
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson
r...@cloudmade.com - Twitter: Russ_OSM -
http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson
.
--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog -
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson
r...@cloudmade.com - Twitter: Russ_OSM -
http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
On Jul 2, 2009, at 6:58 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Nonetheless if
the OSM community wants a share-alike license, it has to use this
sort of
language.
Indeed. Consider what you would say if a lawyer looked at a program
and said Why do we need all this codese?
--
Russ Nelson - http
%20forester%20helmet%20safetypg=PA24
On Jun 26, 2009, at 2:03 AM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Russ Nelson 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
On Jun 24, 2009, at 6:39 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Russ Nelson wrote:
Some of the stuff is there to make sure that we have the right to
redistribute contributions to OSM. This is important and useful.
I was under the impression that these terms did not have anything to
do
with our
provides services in the USA. It can say to
the judge we don't operate in the US; this person has no opportunity
to sue us, but who knows what might happen in the future? Maybe one
of the principals of the OSMF might fly through the US, or move to the
US, or start a US company.
--
Russ Nelson
;
Terraservice Urban
http://terraservice.net/ogcmap.ashx?version=1.1.1request=GetMapLayers=urbanareaStyles=SRS=EPSG:4326format=image/jpeg;
--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog -
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson
r...@cloudmade.com - Twitter: Russ_OSM -
http
, the judge would laugh the OSMF out of court, IF
he didn't fine the OSMF for contempt of court. In order for a
contract to be enforceable it must be a reasonable contract.
On Jun 1, 2009, at 4:02 PM, Francis Davey wrote:
2009/6/1 Russ Nelson r...@cloudmade.com:
Note the (non-exclusively
know if the licenses were ported or
translated (following your use of those two terms), but the goal was
to have licenses which may be read and trusted to be legally accurate
no matter where you are in the EU.
--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog -
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org
country, an entire
theme (e.g. everything tagged with cycleway).
--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog -
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson
r...@cloudmade.com - Twitter: Russ_OSM -
http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson
On Mar 14, 2009, at 4:35 AM, Peter Miller wrote:
the viral nature of these licenses
I don't want a virus, but I like the reciprocal nature of these
licenses.
--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog -
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson
r...@cloudmade.com
problems.
--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog -
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:RussNelson
r...@cloudmade.com - Twitter: Russ_OSM -
http://openstreetmap.org/user/RussNelson
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
On Mar 15, 2009, at 8:33 PM, Simon Ward wrote:
On Sun, Mar 15, 2009 at 08:26:14PM -0400, Russ Nelson wrote:
On Mar 15, 2009, at 6:00 PM, Gervase Markham wrote:
why are we bothering with switching OSM to 1.0 at all?
Why not just wait for the 1.1 fixed version?
1) Because ODbL 1.0 is better
specific needs in
mind, so if the first published version doesn't meet our needs, we can
go back to the well and ask for a revision. But until the ODbL is
finished, we're spinning our wheels. Can we assume that the lawyers
understand the problem and are working on a solution?
--
Russ Nelson
On Mar 1, 2009, at 12:46 PM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
Russ Nelson schrieb:
[...], or your email address
stops working, you waive all right to ownership of your edits.
Probably about as legally binding as posting a note on the site that
says By reading this you agree to sacrifice your
I see your point. Data potentially infringing if removed now could be
recreated now, making later bookkeeping easier.
On Mar 1, 2009, at 7:33 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Russ Nelson wrote:
I don't see much value in removing the data now on the chance that
we might have
to remove
* the public domain merely because you claim that
you have a copyright on it. You only have a copyright on your
creative works; not the public domain.
I may be wrong; I'm not a lawyer; this isn't legal advice.
--
Russ Nelson - http://community.cloudmade.com/blog -
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki
23 matches
Mail list logo
