Sorry I didn't see this thread until today, and I have some thoughts on it.
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
There are now at least 1 to 2 reports every month of folks not giving us
proper CC-BY-SA attribution. These are mostly websites but include
Am 21.03.2011 01:12, schrieb Frederik Ramm:
Certainly not under CC-BY-SA where OSMF has no legal basis for suing anyone
Thats another reason why I prefer a community based approach here.
Beside I think our aim shouldn't be to sue anybody but to fix the
missing license naming.
Matthias
On 21 March 2011 05:54, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote:
What were the suggestions at the meeting(s)? The minutes suggest that
I reported an issue some time ago and they kept it as an item to be
dealt at future meetings for about 6 months and then they sort of let
it fall off at some
2011/3/21 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org:
Russ Nelson wrote:
Gert, as long as OSM is copyrighted, the OSMF will need to be in the
business of suing OSMers.
Certainly not under CC-BY-SA where OSMF has no legal basis for suing anyone
(because even if OSM is copyrighted, OSMF is not the
Might be the legal talklist a better place to discuss this very specific
topic? I guess there are more users that are familar with the process
itself.
Matthias
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Hi,
M?rtin Koppenhoefer wrote:
we already have ODbL / CT for everybody who agreed to the license
change or signed up newly in the last months. For all this data OSMF
already is copyright holder.
No.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33
2011/3/21 Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de:
Might be the legal talklist a better place to discuss this very specific
topic? I guess there are more users that are familar with the process
itself.
So this conversation goes quietly into the night like most other
threads rather than being dealt
Am 21.03.2011 14:53, schrieb John Smith:
2011/3/21 Matthias Meißerdig...@arcor.de:
Might be the legal talklist a better place to discuss this very specific
topic? I guess there are more users that are familar with the process
itself.
So this conversation goes quietly into the night like
!i! wrote:
Was just an idea, cause I noticed that here aren't that much people
interested in this topic, so I assumed at legal mailinglist are more
people that are familar with the OSMF processes. And I didn't saw a
reason to 'annoy' this official list with this very specific topic.
Gert, as long as OSM is copyrighted, the OSMF will need to be in the
business of suing OSMers. If you don't like the idea that the OSMF
should come after a fellow mapper, why, then, welcome to the group of us
who believe that OSM should be in the public domain.
-russ
TBH I really don't care
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 14:01:43 +0100
Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de wrote:
Might be the legal talklist a better place to discuss this very
specific topic? I guess there are more users that are familar with
the process itself.
Matthias
The LWG minutes indicate that Mike is to ask the
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 14:01 +0100, Matthias Meißer wrote:
Might be the legal talklist a better place to discuss this very specific
topic? I guess there are more users that are familar with the process
itself.
This isnt a legalese issue. Well, as much as someone stealing your car
is a
There are now at least 1 to 2 reports every month of folks not giving us
proper CC-BY-SA attribution. These are mostly websites but include
poster advertising, a TV advertisement and a TV show.
We need a reliable process for dealing with these.
Currently, the License Working Group has been
Michael Collinson mike at ayeltd.biz writes:
There are now at least 1 to 2 reports every month of folks not giving us
proper CC-BY-SA attribution. These are mostly websites but include
poster advertising, a TV advertisement and a TV show.
We need a reliable process for dealing with these.
Am 20.03.2011 18:49, schrieb Michael Collinson:
there should be a public record of alleged violations
There is already
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution
IMHO even if a offical License working group making things easier , we
have to take care that this process is
time!
Hall of Shame :
Gert Gremmen
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Michael Collinson [mailto:m...@ayeltd.biz]
Verzonden: zondag 20 maart 2011 18:49
Aan: OSM talk
Onderwerp: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license
violations
There are now at least 1 to 2 reports every month
hi Gert,
well I prefer to do practival things like mapping, too. But with growing
database OSM comes more attractive to others. I don't see any bad things
on monitoring this usage and drop a line, if they miss the license and
OSM hint. Even if this might look small-minded, this just makes
On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 18:49:25 +0100
Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
We need a reliable process for dealing with these.
Currently, the License Working Group has been doing some work but it
feels that it is not dealing with the issues adequately and some
issues not at all.
What
involved !! Nothing to lose but our time!
Hall of Shame :
Gert Gremmen
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Michael Collinson [mailto:m...@ayeltd.biz]
Verzonden: zondag 20 maart 2011 18:49
Aan: OSM talk
Onderwerp: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license
Russ,
Russ Nelson wrote:
Gert, as long as OSM is copyrighted, the OSMF will need to be in the
business of suing OSMers.
Certainly not under CC-BY-SA where OSMF has no legal basis for suing
anyone (because even if OSM is copyrighted, OSMF is not the copyright
holder nor has OSMF been
20 matches
Mail list logo
