Dear Imports Community, Please find the link below for a sample of the digital road data for Tanzania for you to review.
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/uobn0eit9pj4lem/AAA7aiEzcnW_fGll0OnOPwMUa?dl=0 <https://www.dropbox.com/sh/uobn0eit9pj4lem/AAA7aiEzcnW_fGll0OnOPwMUa?dl=0> Andrew [image: JSI Logo]*ANDREW INGLIS* GIS TEAM LEADUSAID | DELIVER PROJECT | *deliver.jsi.com <http://deliver.jsi.com>* PHONE: 703.310.5270 | WWW.JSI.COM <http://www.jsi.com/>[image: Find us on Facebook] <http://www.facebook.com/jsihealth>[image: Follow us on Twitter] <http://www.twitter.com/jsihealth> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 7:40 PM, Rafael Avila Coya <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, James: > > You are probably confusing this emails with an Ottawa city import. Am I > inconrrect? > > Rafael. > > On 18/08/15 12:44, James wrote: > > To me personally it sounds like if you break the above rules i.e. Do > > association by saying this data is from the city of Ottawa, and promote > > it, please pay 200$ to download the same data set; that's when the > > breach of terms of use is met so if someone does sue Ottawa because you > > have been saying It's Ottawa's fault and they sue, you are responsible. > > My phone conversation with Stephen, he said the data is fully open, they > > are just trying to make sure they cover their butts and dont get sued > > based on the data i.e. property line disputes. And I think anyone that > > gets hurt based on the data would sue OSM first, as it's a mixture of > > road data, address data, lakes, rivers data, etc and I'm pretty sure OSM > > has their butts covered to that effect > > > > On Aug 18, 2015 3:24 AM, "Martin Koppenhoefer" <[email protected] > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > > > sent from a phone > > > > Am 18.08.2015 um 01:02 schrieb Christoph Hormann > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>: > > > > >> Therefore, in providing these > > >> instructions they are giving permission for the data to be on and > > >> used in OSM. > > > > > > And that is not sufficient - there has to be a permission to > relicense > > > the data under ODbL which includes the possibility to use and > > > distribute the data outside OSM. > > > > > > I don't think that referring the ODbL explicitly is required or even > > betterq than saying: use in OSM under whatever license they use > > (i.e. a clause that allows the use also under future licenses after > > potential license changes). > > > > cheers > > Martin > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Imports mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Imports mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports > > > > -- > Twitter: @ravilacoya <http://twitter.com/ravilacoya> > *Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team (HOT)* <http://www.hotosm.org> > > _______________________________________________ > Imports mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports >
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
