On Mon, Jun 8, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Henk Hoff o...@toffehoff.nl wrote:
Peter Millar schreef:
- Original Message -
From: Henk Hoff o...@toffehoff.nl
To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Saturday, 6 June, 2009 01:54:07 GMT +00:00 GMT
Hi,
Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
Facts are Facts and can't be Copyrighted
... which ist not exactly the position that OSM is taking on this
matter; in fact, with ODBL we go to great lengths to ensure that even if
our facts should not be copyrightable we still get to say exactly under
what
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
Facts are Facts and can't be Copyrighted
... which ist not exactly the position that OSM is taking on this
matter; in fact, with ODBL we go to great lengths to ensure that even if
our facts should not be copyrightable we
Matt Amos wrote:
RichardF's findings on tracing over photographs make me wonder
whether similar arguments can be made for tracing over rendered
images.
Well, the issue is whether licensing an image as BSD (or CC-BY-SA, or
all-rights-reserved, or whatever) automatically overwrites all other
Dave Stubbs wrote:
how does 4.3 interact with that, or any of this discussion
about bsd/whatever-the-hell-you-like licenses for produced
works? (the you must attribute the database on produced
works bit)
I don't see any way in which ODbL allows you to distribute a Produced Work
without
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 9:07 AM, Frederik Rammfrede...@remote.org wrote:
Matt Amos wrote:
my understanding is that, because we have database rights (and
possibly other IP rights) in the original database, the re-created
database is still (a substantial extract of) an ODbL licensed
database.
Puneet Kishor, who is a Science Commons Fellow looking at geospatial
data and climate change, will be attending and hoisting the facts can't
be copyrighted flag.
jtw
legal-talk-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 10:06:00 +0200
From: Frederik Ramm
