good any time ;)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
-comments?uid=1836535&commented
is another site that has all your writing nicely listed.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk
t covered either by the ODbL
Assuming that the data is covered by ODbL, then "These rights explicitly
include commercial use, and do not exclude any field of endeavour."
(section 3.0)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N4
Hi,
On 14.12.19 06:41, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> Can you point me to legal definition
> of "substantial part"?
There is none, hence:
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Substantial_-_Guideline
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@rem
ld they possibly be used to reassemble
OSM).
I had until now assumed that such works would definitely fall under the
ODbL but you are right, they don't really fit the "Derivative Database"
definition.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail fred
l, the OSM data residue is in the name/description of my new
database: "roads with pubs". It is derived from OSM; it could not have
been made without OSM.
Do you disagree?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
__
ou use is
less than 100 - an crucially this could be after the trivial alterations
you mention - then the extract you are making is considered not to be
substantial (see
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Substantial_-_Guideline)
and therefore does not have to be und
the group/company members and other members difficult, and good
communication is a cornerstone of every successful organised editing
activity.
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
__
and still
remain 100% intellectual property of its operator?
Further, assuming that we have a system that has ingested OSM by deep
learning and we say that this means its internal database is ODbL, what
would this mean for the output later produced by the same machine?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik R
hem if that kind of notice is enough.
This is a similar issue as we always have with CC-BY licensed data.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing
aded, but other than that, you need to
use your favourite search engine with something like
"site:lists.openstreetmap.org legal-talk mykeyword".
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
or under Your control by
either more than 50% ownership or by the power to direct their
activities (such as contracting with an independent consultant)."
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
_
minimum possible that I'm not comfortable
discussing this further. If keeping data proprietary for financial gain
is part of your business model, you should really just look into working
with proprietary data to start with, rather than trying to create an
"OSM++" that you don't h
ch is
ok, then *all* data you uploaded might have to be removed again.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
agreement, the "User"
is the individual mapper, who creates a derivative work on his computer
and then uploads to OSM; in that case the mapper would have to "mark"
his upload (possibly in a source tag?) with "contains Copernicus data
(year of reception)" and then OSM would b
his" request or did you
choose a "you have to share this so give it to me" wording?
Bye
Frederik
[1]
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Trivial_Transformations_-_Guideline
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
opy of the data"), or have they been like ("Hello XXX
your data is ODbL hence you must give it to me") from the start?
I trust this satisfies your desire for a discussion about this topic.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23
heir spare time to improve it), then it
will not be viable in OSM either - only that the situation would be less
obvious.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
t mean it is the natural receptacle.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
k the wheelchair status they observed locally, and you collect that
information in a separate data set, keyed by the OSM ID of the
restaurant. Your application queries the database in a way that your
user reports override the information taken from OSM, but for
restaurants where you don't have user
ot;. If we as a
project find an answer to that, then we can let lawyers fix (or
interpret) the license so that it delivers what we want.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
hare-alike applies. This is not great - I'd love a license
that forces people to share stuff we're interested in and ignores
everything else. But it is hard to put that in lawyerese ;)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°
everse geocoding result, and that you join them when displaying,
and make the OSM result database available under ODbL on request. I
would also tell you that it is very unlikely for anyone to request the
data in the first place.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00&#x
geocoding result as a produced work, combining a
large number of them in a database would still get you a derived
database again.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
ely based on OSM but had proprietary data improvements, and the
exposure OSM would get from that would be worth nothing as nobody else
could use that same database.
This would be a use case that the license is specifically designed
against and we must take care not to weaken our position he
ar as
"this address is at location lon=x, lat=y" is concerned).
Is there any doubt about any of these three statements either on your
side or anyone else's?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
acle for other people's
geodata.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
n-substantial parts
and combining them to form a database is the same as if you had
extracted a larger portion directly. This is true even if the data is
extracted by different individuals.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N4
t
> legal/desirable that the POI is added anyway?
Sure, buildings to hold the POI are not required.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
is the
exact opposite of such reciprocity.
Asking for PD while not giving your own away as PD is quite standard
actually - not least among most of those calling for OSM to be PD.
Nothing funny about that.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.o
alling the party out for what they're doing, which would likely damage
their business.
The "moral stick" is probably the strongest weapon in our arsenal
anyway, looking at the size of our legal battle chest ;)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede..
I don't have enough information to say whether the PDF will be a
produced work or a database, but even if it were a database, it could be
a "collective database" in which case share-alike would only apply to
the ODbL part inside.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...
e data format a secret if you, in parallel, distribute
an ASCII dump of the same.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
p a
warning if what you're currently mapping is outside of such a
spatio-temporal window).
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
ely deciding what to show in a produced
> work from a 'closed' database by comparing against an odbl licensed
> database somehow imposes that the closed database must also be odbl?
Not the closed database, only the selection made from the closed
database with the help of ODbL-licensed
ly an empty column for use cases #2-#4 and #7. I added no extra
column for #5 and #6 because those struck me as identical under both
interpretations but of course I might be wrong.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
_
t; alternative because the idea is that
your proprietary data (store opening times or whatnot) form a collective
database with the ODbL-Share-Alike location data.
It would be great if people would help fill in the blanks, or correct me
where I might have misrepresented the discussion.
Bye
Frederik
-
look at the letter of
the license but also at the process that has led to its implementation,
or in other words, at the intention that people had when they
implemented the license.
And that, in turn, is probably why we're talking so much about use cases
and do-we-want-this and do-we-want-tha
again we hear, make it easier for people to geocode their
proprietary databases and OSM can only benefit from it because everyone
who saves $$$ using OSM somehow magically "helps" OSM. I'm not convinced
of that.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°
n of "is this for human consumption or for a
computer's", it is clearly for a computer's - since the coordinates form
the basis for filtering which items to display to the user. A human
wouldn't be able to sift through the list so quickly.
B
ause if it is, it seems to require a
*lot* more explanation because it doesn't sound very convincing to me.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
l
n the page are
essentially such misunderstandings, unless of course they are not
substantial.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@ope
inition of feature types arbitrary - could I
make a restaurant database where I take "all revolving Italian rooftop
restaurants" from OSM and all others from a different data set, or is
"revolving Italian rooftop restaurant" too specific a
g speed recordings to OSM street
data to find out which street the recording was for in the first place,
thereby creating a derivative database.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
ut the facts depicted by the images are not
> property of Google.
>
>Your thoughts, please
The general opinion on this list has been, for cases where there wasn't
a clear-cut license that answers these questions: "We'll use the data if
the copyright owner says we can
Hi,
On 13.01.2014 22:52, Stephan Knauss wrote:
> As long as other map suppliers like Google and
> Bing are happy by being only credited on a separate page,
Are they?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09&
ace.
I don't think that's acceptable.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
yer would not have to be released because
OSM was not used in creating it.
Was that layperson friendly enough?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
ivated as a base map in tha layer switcher) seems to indicate
that buildings look similar to OSM but not the same (my guess - both
imported from same source?) while many parks, commercial areas, and
graveyards seem to have 100% identical geometries to OSM.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ##
use
and I'm not bound by their respective license terms.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
ardware device that can
*only* play the encrypted cards, would a "here's the pbf download" link
not be less accessible for him...?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
__
s you
from prohibiting stuff!
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
for the purpose of instruction -
some people might look at our web page and think "I'll simply do as they
do, they'll know what is right".
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
__
nd out the fastest route at a given
time of day or so - that kind of tight integration with OSM data would
clearly be "ask a lawyer" terrain if you want to determine wheter you
have a collective or derivative database.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N
o:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Closed_Issues#What_sort_of_access_to_Derivative_Databases_is_required.3F
The page is quite old; the green boxes represent legal advice that we
have received at the time.
Bye
Frederik
--
F
sufficiently secretive as not to hurt
their business.
I'm willing to hear concrete examples but I think that talk of "giving
up" and "too much at stake" sound like OSM was unsuitable for geocoding
which in my opinion it clearly isn't!
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik R
ding..."; OSM has even been offered, on several occasions,
"donated" POI data where it later turned out that they had not surveyed
the POI locations but just ran their addresses by a commercial geocoder
and disregarded the license restrictions.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm
ot interested in a functioning road network at all but who would be
prepared to invest quite a bit of money to "switch2osm" their geocoding.
So it seems that maybe address data is as valuable as the street network
and should have the same level of protection?
Bye
Frederik
--
Fred
ot;, or "buy ArcGIS and then do that" - but what if the
algorithm includes "run this code, it will take 1000 days", or "make
sure your machine has at least 1 TB of RAM, then continue as follows...".
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00
s
(unless you put some in).
If you sell the work with an OSM attribution but without the condition
to perpetuate that attribution, you may be in breach of ODbL or you may
not; this depends on how you interpret the "suitably calculated to make
anyone ... aware" clause.
Bye
Frederi
d I guess there will be some loophole to
make it not so ;)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
accept that; I don't think that "geocode as
much as you want without sharing any data" is possible with the ODbL
data set.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
license also has alternatives to "making the data available";
you could also make the process available that leads to the data. But I
assume this is not an interesting option for you.
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
Hi,
On 08/10/2012 10:09 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
The ODbL has a clause softening that rule (4.7. b "parallel
distribution"), which essentially says that you can distribute
DRM-encumbered databases if you offer a non-DRM alternative that is "at
least as accessible as the non-rest
they have liability paranoia.
Therefore I think neither license is an obstacle for them, because
neither forces them to open up the car navigation system to free imports
by the user.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
Hi,
On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 12:44:41 +
Mike Dupont wrote:
> Lets be clear here, I think the problems is not because of the license
> change, but the contributor terms , ( the click through license and
> the mass collection of all IP rights by the OSF).
There is no click-through license.
There
Hi,
On Sat, 28 Jul 2012 01:23:00 +0200
Tobias Knerr wrote:
> Not dropping CC-BY-SA would send the signal that
... everything that has been said about CC-BY-SA not sufficiently
protecting our data was rubbish, and that we are happy with every user
choosing whichever is the "weaker" license for t
Hi,
On Fri, 27 Jul 2012 22:33:59 +0200
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> That's not the point, you still can't mix the future OSM data with
> CC-By-SA data in the same database and publish that. This ability to
> "mix" is one of the main features of free licensing and if you're
> using a license incom
it is not mentioned at all.
I think you need a better example
No; the example is good enough for me, thank you ;)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing lis
y the power to direct their
activities (such as contracting with an independent consultant).
<<<
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
ated re-extraction of our data
with less than x% precision loss is a derivative database and never a
produced work
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-tal
ossible to
licene Produced Works under CC, or we will have to explicitly disallow it.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
could team up with a co-publisher, publish
your ODbL Produced Works to him and he forwards them to the world
without you ever having to release anything. It would be a loophole that
demands quick fixing ;)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N
whether you get away with it is probably a question of
jurisdiction.
(If anyone wants to pursue this discussion I would very much ask them to
peruse the mailing list archives with the search term "reverse
engineering" and read up on past discussions so that we don't have to
ne took the image from Wikipedia and then credited "Wikipedia" -
they *have* to continue to use the OSM attribution and ODbL license
notice or else they violate CC-BY-SA. But that's the same with any other
image on Wikipedia so I guess it should be clear to all.)
Bye
Frederik
--
out "Redaction 1"/"Redaction 2". If you have any
Rails skills then your help is certainly welcome.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
derived products that are re-distributable?"
"2. Creating a slope map"
This all sounds as if I *can* download the data and use it for
hillshading as long as I don't redistribute the data itself. Doesn't it?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@r
n't).
But as I said at the beginning, I'm not aware of any policy already in
existence.
As a rule of thumb, as long as you don't do anything that provokes a
community outcry you'll probably be ok.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.
copies for you that would already be distribution.
(What happens of the MoD takes an OSM map, draws a little bit on top of
it and stamps it "secret" - is that allowed at all, given that the
current license requires that they must not add any restrictions to the
material...?)
Bye
Fr
Does this mean that they can do that
Sure.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
don't see a problem
anymore, as there wouldn't be a problem for me to provide something like
"live-views" of the data. But it would be nice to hear some comments if
I'm right, about the way to handle the data!?
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°0
ne else's copyright because the original owner already
authorized OSMF to distribute their data.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
s the
database", or if in CC's case the adaptation is only the web site with
the route instructions...
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
lega
with the exact same number of
nodes which all have the exact same relative position to each other.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing lis
r journalist to contact RichardF
directly.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
appy to
lose a few roads in the US". These reasons are especially bad because
they an be repeated month after month and thus could make the process
drag on endlessly.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
moving this burden
from UMP, then OSMF could offer to publish a derived non-highway
database themselves, which would lead to UMP only having to point to
that database and say "there's our source and it's ODbL".
Bye
Frederik
--
Freder
2/3 of active contributors" clause and
therefore create a situation in which no future OSMF can change the
license without going through what we go through now. Of course the CTs
cannot be changed retroactively but doing so for new signups is
effective enough.
Bye
anybody involved has already booked his vacation after
April 1st, we may continue in May to pursue a clean license change.
Cheers
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailin
* us that there is
this additional requirement (CT only require that the mapper makes sure
data is "compatible with current license")
Any future license change to, say, CC-BY or GFDL3.15 or whatever would
then require that data to be deleted, but we wouldn't even know that.
Hi,
(taking this to legal-talk from talk where it doesn't belong)
On 02/13/12 00:00, nicholas.g.lawre...@tmr.qld.gov.au wrote:
I accepted the license, and also ticked the box that said I was happy with
my contributions to be considered public domain.
Hypothetically, if some years in the future
ice versa. There are simply not
so many cases of that to warrant all the brouhaha that is made.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstre
hase would actually make
people re-map more and better compared to the phase we are in now? And
if so, why?
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
leg
order to prevent us from overseeing something.
Well if you find certainty, be sure to inform us since we'll be very
interested ;)
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
__
Hi,
On 01/19/12 03:07, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
Giżycko is one example, http://osm.org/go/0Pp7zn7~-- . As FK28..
pointed out the major such cases are where mappers who imported
ODbL-incompatible data accepted the Contributor Terms or CT-accepters
import ODbL-incompatible data. With version 1.2
gnore the copyright of small contributors because they won't
sue anyway"
Not my style.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing lis
ding to the
then-believed-final rules, it could happen that someone later points out
an oversight, or a court decides something, forcing us to remove things
we thought we could keep or vice versa. You can only ever go up to 80%
certainty in these matters. Demanding more is
one step back and you'll see
that basically we're all of the same tribe.
And this is what is difficult to understand. The tribe and its
"sub-group" are still far closer in culture, ideas, and outlook than the
tribes on the other side of the river. They should stick together.
whole object.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
1 - 100 of 684 matches
Mail list logo
