Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Fwd: OSM (Open Street Map) Creative Commons Licence 2.5 (CCL) versus GeoBase Unrestricted Use Licence Agreement (GeoBase licence)

Nick Black wrote: > Hello, > > I've been involved in some ongoing dialogue with Natural Resources, > Government of Canada, who are keen for their National Road Network to > be used by OSM. There are a few particularities of the license that > need clarifying on OSM's party. Natural Resources are h

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Fwd: OSM (Open Street Map) Creative Commons Licence 2.5 (CCL) versus GeoBase Unrestricted Use Licence Agreement (GeoBase licence)

On 08/04/2008, Nick Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I've been involved in some ongoing dialogue with Natural Resources, > Government of Canada, who are keen for their National Road Network to > be used by OSM. There are a few particularities of the license that > need clarifying

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Fwd: OSM (Open Street Map) Creative Commons Licence 2.5 (CCL) versus GeoBase Unrestricted Use Licence Agreement (GeoBase licence)

Robin Paulson wrote: > have i missed something? i thought osm used "Creative Commons > Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 license" not "Creative Commons Share Alike > 2.5 Licence" > > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/OpenStreetMap_License I assume the name difference was just loose wording; all re

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] linz dataset for nz - attribution methods summary

On 08/04/2008, 80n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > if we are going to have an 'attribution' page on the wiki[1], with the > > > fine print regarding sources of various chunks of data, would a link > > > to it be possible, on the main map page? titled say 'data attribution' > > > or 'data sources'?

[OSM-legal-talk] Fwd: OSM (Open Street Map) Creative Commons Licence 2.5 (CCL) versus GeoBase Unrestricted Use Licence Agreement (GeoBase licence)

Hello, I've been involved in some ongoing dialogue with Natural Resources, Government of Canada, who are keen for their National Road Network to be used by OSM. There are a few particularities of the license that need clarifying on OSM's party. Natural Resources are happy that OSM's current cc-by

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Crown copyright, OS and year of publication

Andy Robinson (blackadder) wrote: > It's interesting looking at the situation with some of the OS 1:25,000 > mapping. The vast majority of the maps I have do not state a copyright date, For some jurisdictions and for some periods of time, failure to make an explicit copyright claim (or making an

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

Michael Collinson wrote: > I echo Tom's sentiment that www.openstreetmap.org/Attribution > would be a cleaner public > link to present if possible. The shorter, the better (sometimes space is limited). So why not, with a small DNS change: openstreetma

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Crown copyright, OS and year of publication

Richard Fairhurst wrote: >Sent: 07 April 2008 5:09 PM >To: Licensing and other legal discussions. >Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Crown copyright, OS and year of publication > >Tim Sheerman-Chase wrote: > >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Out_of_copyright >> >> Is that interpretation about

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Crown copyright, OS and year of publication

Tim Sheerman-Chase wrote: > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Out_of_copyright > > Is that interpretation about the FIRST year of publication definitely > correct? Or should it be the year of last update? Has this been > discussed before? The "FIRST" is pretty meaningless. The 1954 revision

[OSM-legal-talk] Crown copyright, OS and year of publication

Hi All, On the wiki for out of copyright maps, it states: > Maps published by the Ordnance Survey are Crown Copyright as > stipulated in the terms of The Copyright, Designs and Patent Act 1998 > (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1988/Ukpga_19880048_en_1.htm). > Therein, Chapter X. Section 163,

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

> I would prefer a url like attribution.openstreetmap.org or > www.openstreetmap.org/attribution but it should still, IMHO, point to the > same wiki page. I agree with www.openstreetma.org/attribution ; however, I don't think that wikifying the attribution would be a good idea. Allowing every u

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Tom Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I would certainly prefer that people using our data provide a link >> to www.openstreetmap.org or the top level wiki index page as that >> would do a better

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Frederik Ramm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hallo, > > >I'd like to propose that we make the following statement: > > >"If you publish OpenStreetMap data you can satisfy the attribution > >requirement of the license by linking to or referencing > >htt

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

Michael Collinson wrote: > Other than that, well, I think we both share the same opinion that > the current license is just unworkable full stop! :-) There's probably not a lot of point making a big song and dance about attribution at present. In a month or two's time, when we're ready to vot

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

At 02:47 PM 4/7/2008, Frederik Ramm wrote: >Hallo, > > >I'd like to propose that we make the following statement: > > >"If you publish OpenStreetMap data you can satisfy the attribution > >requirement of the license by linking to or referencing > >http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

Quoting Michael Collinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > I echo Tom's sentiment that www.openstreetmap.org/Attribution would be > a cleaner public link to present if possible. You can request under BY-SA 2.0 that a URL be presented with the work. See BY-SA 2.0 section 4.c: http://creativecommons.org/l

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 1:40 PM, Tom Hughes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > Up to now there has not been any official guidance on how to comply with > the > > attribution clause of our CC-BY-SA license. This means that people >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

Hallo, >I'd like to propose that we make the following statement: >"If you publish OpenStreetMap data you can satisfy the attribution >requirement of the license by linking to or referencing >http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Attribution"; But you are aware of the fact that

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Up to now there has not been any official guidance on how to comply with the > attribution clause of our CC-BY-SA license. This means that people either > try to do something that they hope is acceptable or they do nothing. Some

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 01:19:15PM +0100, 80n wrote: > "If you publish OpenStreetMap data you can satisfy the attribution > requirement of the license by linking to or referencing > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Attribution"; > > Discuss. +1. cu bart __

[OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

Up to now there has not been any official guidance on how to comply with the attribution clause of our CC-BY-SA license. This means that people either try to do something that they hope is acceptable or they do nothing. Some of OSM's own outputs fall into the latter category (for example, the AP

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] linz dataset for nz - attribution methods summary

On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Stephen Gower < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 08:48:18PM +1200, Robin Paulson wrote: > > > > if we are going to have an 'attribution' page on the wiki[1], with the > > fine print regarding sources of various chunks of data, would a link > > to