My understanding is that Nearmap wish all contributions to OSM, by any
mapper who has agreed to the CT, derived from their imagery (before the 17th
June 2011) to be able to be relicenced by OSMF under any licence it (OSMF)
chooses at any time.
However I also can't see exactly how the published
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 09:12:24 +0800
James Andrewartha tr...@student.uwa.edu.au wrote:
Sadly, that's not how I understand it - particularly the terms in
place between OSM and the individual ... at the relevant time. bit
says to me that retrospective signing of the CTs to cover old
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote:
the last time I read the CTs (which have several versions), there was a
clear reference to me having the rights to the data and perpetually
licensing those rights to another organisation
That would stop me signing up
So those guys put out a legal statement and an employee even gave you his
interpretation on this list, which you can cite in court if you want. I think
you're pretty solid and it feels like people are just looking for problems no
matter what is done or said. :-(
Steve
stevecoast.com
On Jun
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:15 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
The current boundaries will be removed in the near future, so if I
were you I wouldn't spend to much time fussing over them.
Oh? Do tell?
Steve
___
Talk-au mailing list
On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 11:14 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:15 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
The current boundaries will be removed in the near future, so if I
were you I wouldn't spend to much time fussing over them.
Oh? Do tell?
All ABS boundaries
-- Forwarded message --
From: Steve Coast st...@asklater.com
Date: 17 June 2011 07:09
Subject: [OSM-talk] Bing aerial imagery priorities
To: t...@openstreetmap.org
Hi
I'm speaking personally and there are no guarantees here but I'd like
to get input on what areas you would like
Yes Steve - you're right.
The For Clarity paragraph basically says that contributions from a mapper
who hadn't accepted the CT and were derived from Nearmap prior to June 17th
2011 can stay in the data base and do not have to be deleted.
They give no time limit or OSM-licence limitations on this
On 16 June 2011 14:48, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote:
That it was drafted, carefully, by a lawyer I do not doubt. But lawyers
draft things on instruction to achieve particular goals. My understanding
from Ben's comment is that one of the goals of nearmap is that derived works
are
Ben said,
I say again: that's exactly what it was intended to achive
and it was written by our lawyers to do just that. :)
Thanks Ben,
That makes it crystal clear that nearmappers can accept the CT's.
Now hopefully a certain OSMer will find it in their hearts to accept the CT
and then I can
On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 14:21 +1000, Nick Hocking wrote:
Ben said,
I say again: that's exactly what it was intended to achive
and it was written by our lawyers to do just that. :)
Thanks Ben,
That makes it crystal clear that nearmappers can accept the CT's.
Well, mappers who exclusively
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:42 AM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote:
On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 11:14 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote:
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:15 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
The current boundaries will be removed in the near future, so if I
were you I
An article on the OSM licence change on O'Reilly Radar blog.
http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/openstreetmap-creative-commons-open-database-license.html
--
Craig Feuerherdt
___
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
13 matches
Mail list logo
