On 10 January 2012 12:07, David Earl <da...@frankieandshadow.com> wrote:
> On 10/01/2012 11:44, Peter Miller wrote: > >> Is there no way in this case to formally 'claim' the IPR for this >> features on the basis that we have moved them and edited all the >> surrounding features? >> > > Exactly the question I raised on talk on Monday. I don't think you even > need to have moved anything, merely to have checked against a valid source > other than the non-accepting contributor (e.g. Bing for location, local > knowledge or OSSV etc for names) in order to claim the IPR. I really don't > see what mechanically then reproducing what is already there actually adds > to the process other than wasted time. > Thank you. This is a matter of judgement by the Licensing Working Group and they should come back with a clear view on it. Can I suggest that we invent a new tag which 'claims' the IPR for the affected way. 'ODBL_clear=PeterIto' for example. The existence of this tag would remove it from the problem list. Any challenge over ownership would then be between the original contributor and the person who added the tag. Personally I am not intending to spend time on this matter until we can get a sensible decision for these outlying cases. Regards, Peter > > David > >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
