Hi,
Anthony wrote:
Strongly agree. Whether started and/or spread by CC, OSM, both, or
neither, there definitely seems to be a common misconception that OSM
is simply a database of facts,
Well I for one still believe that OSM is aiming to be a database of facts.
and that therefore what's
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 5:03 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I think that the misconception from which CC is now distancing themselves is
that data should be licensed CC0, not OSM is a databae of facts.
Do you think they are also distancing themselves from the position
that
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 5:03 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I think that the misconception from which CC is now distancing themselves is
that data should be licensed CC0, not OSM is a databae of facts.
Do you think
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 6:27 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Personally I'm hoping for a CC-BY-SA which states explicitly that it
does not cover unoriginal facts and that it only covers the expression
half of the idea/expression divide.
Ugh, sorry for the imprecise language (this is why I'm