2009/3/8 Andy Allan gravityst...@gmail.com:
On 7 Mar 2009, at 23:56, OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sat, Mar 7, 2009 at 9:10 PM, Gervase Markham gerv-
gm...@gerv.net wrote:
b) If people are reverse-engineering our stuff, they need a
massive, sustained, continuous Mechanical Turk
On Sun, 2009-03-08 at 13:00 +0100, Frederik Ramm wrote:
If someone really wants to jump through these
hoops to get it done, let him do it. I think this will be a niche
application and, if at all, only used very seldom.
And if we later find that someone is really being a thorn in our side
On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Ulf Möller use...@ulfm.de wrote:
The problem with this though is that if you make an exemption for
CC-BY-SA then you can drive the whole planet file through that loophole.
If you want to close the loophole, you will need to get everyone to
accept the
On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 6:02 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 7:37 PM, Ulf Möller use...@ulfm.de wrote:
The problem with this though is that if you make an exemption for
CC-BY-SA then you can drive the whole planet file through that loophole.
If you want to
Hi,
Gervase Markham wrote:
I would be reluctant to name them. Assuming the data remains bound by
some form of share-alike, in 50 years time, OSM or OSM derivatives is
going to be the only database anyone ever uses for storing and
retrieving public global mapping data. At that point, we
Hi,
Jean-Christophe Haessig wrote:
I posted a comment on co-ment and on the wiki use cases page, where it
didn’t seem to belong. I was advised to post it here
Maybe those who advised you hoped that you would read the ongoing
discussion before posting ;-)
Your suggestion is similar to what I
On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 9:17 PM, Jean-Christophe Haessig
jean-christophe.haes...@dianosis.org wrote:
In fact, we might not have to define what a Produced Work is. Instead,
we could let the producer of the derived work fully decide:
My current interpretation of the ODbL is that this is
Le dimanche 08 mars 2009 à 22:49 +0100, Frederik Ramm a écrit :
Hi,
Maybe those who advised you hoped that you would read the ongoing
discussion before posting ;-)
Well, I read it, but I felt that the idea was rather dimly suggested…
Current ODbL mandates[*]that the derivative database on
Hi,
Jean-Christophe Haessig wrote:
If section 4.7
is where it is required to transfer the reverse engineereng clause into
the PW’s license, why doesn’t it say so?
If I tell you I give you this book but it must not be scanned and put
on the internet, then while I don't explicitly say and if
