I'm pretty sure that Martijn means does NOT allow, rather than now. :-)
So, whatever you are planning, Jennifer, hitting the editing API is
probably going to get you some unwanted attention. There are other
ways to access the OpenStreetMap data, and you'll want to make sure
that you are using
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 6:17 PM, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote:
On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Updated:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Open_Data_License%2FGeocoding_-_Guidelinediff=1102233oldid=1076215
Hey Martin -
Didn't Steve C publish an automated tool to create road geometry from
aerial imagery when he was at Microsoft?
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
Thanks to all have responded specifically or generally on our community
guidelines draft. I have been able to make a number of small changes which
tighten and clarify without changing intent.
I have made one large edit
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 2:44 AM, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
[ ... ]
[And if anyone in the UK wants to help them by creating tiles from scratch
under a CC-BY license, let me know and I'll pass on. It does seem to be in
a good cause. But the core question is still a good one to
On Sat, May 3, 2014 at 11:51 AM, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
Open data is a different animal to software source code and highly-creative
works and I suspect it will [be] a few more years yet until we understand it
all
fully.
Sure. Of course, we are part of why it is a big deal
On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:56 AM, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote:
I just posted a writeup on my diary on how we're attributing OpenStreetMap
at Mapbox.
[ ... ]
[ and from the blog ]
(c) Mapbox (c) OpenStreetMap links to https://www.mapbox.com/about/maps with
a full listing of all sources.
[
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote:
[ ... ]
But it is a reality that [ fear of a Share Alike obligation(?)]* slows,
or in some cases stops, adoption of/contribution to OSM.
Slows contribution to OpenStreetMap? That sounds incorrect to me.
ODbL and
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 1:02 PM, Mike Dupont
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
the wikipedia has a nice otrs system, I supposed you could use it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:OTRS
so let them sign something that allows the data to be used by wikipedia and
that should cover osm
What do you suggest, Martin?
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 10:26 AM, Pierre Béland pierz...@yahoo.fr wrote:
Eh good news for OSM-Quebec community then. Let's wait for the official
confirmation of the exact license adopted.
I disagree.
Any license drafted or adopted by a Canadian government, other than a
no-restrictions,
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Mike Linksvayer m...@gondwanaland.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
[ ... ]
Again, any government open data publication in Canada must be licensed
ODC-PDDL, or else it is a not-open-enough-closed-data-failure
On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 8:48 AM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote:
Hi All,
This has come up before. HOT is part of a pilot for the initiative
Imagery to the Crowd (1). Representatives of HOT and the US
Government met multiple times in all day meetings to discuss what the
NextView license
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:11 PM, Rob smartt...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello.
Would like to ask / discuss with you the new license for OSM if you do not
mind.
I have a website that I would like to integrate/include OSM map tiles into.
What I would like to clarify is if I would be required to
Looks like Apple is now crediting OpenStreetMap in version 1.0.1 of iPhoto,
as reported by OSMer Beelsebob, on #osm IRC :-)
http://cl.ly/421B0u2r0u0J3o0I3e3s
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
On Mon, Apr 2, 2012 at 7:23 AM, Pavel Machek pa...@ucw.cz wrote:
Hi!
So lets start by saying that I don't like ODbL and I hate CT.
There are three classes of data I uploaded to osm:
a) Hand created data, most important paths in the woods. CT+ODbL, is
okay for those.
b) ODbL compatible -
2012/4/2 Petr Morávek [Xificurk] xific...@gmail.com:
Hi,
I admit that I'm pretty confused right now... Are you saying that you've
changed your mind and are willing to agree to ODbL+CT, except for the
changesets containing imports of incompatible data? That would be really
great!
If this is
2012/3/31 Darko Sokolić darko.soko...@xnet.hr:
Dear colleagues,
I contributed to OpenStreetMap under CC-BY-SA 2.0 license. It was great
pleasure, and I enjoyed it very much.
I did not accept new Contributor Terms and new license.
Also, I did not authorise anyone, in any way, to relicense
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote:
Well essentially CC-by only imposes attribution so it is doable.
But in any case: is the import listed in the import catalogue?
If not, I would respectfully ask the DWG to summarily delete the data (the
enforce bit of my
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 5:40 AM, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
I am deeply shocked this morning to learn of the murder of [our] friend Ulf.
The OSMF site has a page where we can add our memories of Ulf.
http://blog.osmfoundation.org/2012/01/18/ulf-m%C3%B6ller-1973-2012/
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Yes. I have no strong feelings either way; your argument is correct. However
the question must be asked in how far you can claim copyright for facts that
others have to extract from your prose. In my personal opinion, if
compliance of any object. The LWG
would like to adopt this as policy and would be grateful for community
feedback.
We look forward to your thoughtful, insightful feedback.
Best regards and Happy Mapping,
Richard Weait on behalf of LWG
___
legal-talk mailing
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org wrote:
On 12/20/2011 10:11 PM, Apollinaris Schoell wrote:
Of particular interest are:
- can node positions be cleaned by moving to a new position?
While you are at it, I would love to hear about a specific subset of the
On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 1:17 PM, Jo winfi...@gmail.com wrote:
[ ... ]
I do have a suggestion to help identify which tags/properties are the
ones contributed by somebody who declined or who can't be reached. Now
I have to go an dig in the history to check who added names and other
properties,
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Josh Doe j...@joshdoe.com wrote:
As I've had no response from this list,
Hi Josh,
I believe that standardized licenses for Open Data are a Very Good
Thing. Perhaps, you can show them the benefit of selecting a license
from Open Data Commons?
Best regards,
[Redirected from talk-au to legal-talk due to topic of discussion]
Andrew Laughton wrote:
Irony is when you buy a shiny new GPS loaded with OSM data, only
to find out that you need to pay a license fee to be able to update
the map.
Gotta love that new license.
[Response from Richard
2011/7/11 Holger Schöner nume...@ancalime.de:
Hello,
[I am sorry if this is a FAQ, but this matter is urgent, and a cursory web
search has not provided sufficient information for me to answer these
questions]
I am in negotiation with a provider of aerial images (for Austria), who
wants to
On Sat, Jun 18, 2011 at 5:39 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 June 2011 19:22, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote:
Tiles are clearly *maps* and so protected as artistic works under
article 2(1) of the Berne Convention and therefore (one hopes) in
every country which is a
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:50 AM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
Olaf Schmidt-Wischhöfer schrieb:
The first problem is that the right to vote depends upon being allowed to
contribute.
It it defined anywhere what contribute means?
From the contributor terms v1.2.4
An active
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 4:09 PM, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote:
Word in quotes below relate to the meanings given them by ODbL
Assume I use jxapi to download an extract of the main OSM database . Is the
downloaded extract a Derivative Database, or since the download was
provided
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
As per the implementation plan [1], we intend to move to phase 4 this Sunday
19th June or as soon after as is technically practical. This will mean that
anyone who has explictly declined the new contributor terms will no
Also the current acceptance numbers are ~166,000 accepting, vs. 406 declined.
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 9:30 PM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
Hi all
As promised, with apologies for the delay, here is the statement from NearMap
regarding submission of derived works of our PhotoMaps to OSM.
Dear Ben,
Thank you for providing this clear statement, for NearMap's
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Mikel Maron mikel_ma...@yahoo.com wrote:
Legal-talk, any opinions or insights on this question?
== Mikel Maron ==
+14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
From: Mikel Maron mikel_ma...@yahoo.com
To: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Ciprian Talaba cipriantal...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I would be interested to know if this is the place where we can discuss
possible OSM copyright violations or should I direct my concerns directly to
the Data Working Group? The problems I noticed are related to
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 12:59 PM, john wilbanks
wilba...@creativecommons.org wrote:
Yup, I said this:
I'm going to be a little provocative here and say that your data is
already unprotected [under CC-BY-SA], and you cannot slap a license on
it and protect it. ... That means I'm free to ignore
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Maarten Deen md...@xs4all.nl wrote:
Why is that 2/3 majority not sought for the current license move?
Current respondents are far above 2/3 accepting the new license and
contributor terms.
___
legal-talk mailing list
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:56 AM, OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com wrote:
My account used for importing PGS coastlines just got an email asking
that it agree to new contributor terms - has anyone already declared
this is OK during the import-checking phase of license change?
Asking on mailing list,
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 6:54 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Michael Collinson mike@... writes:
- In the case of a major license change, there would be a run up of
at least several months of publicity and discussion before the final
formal vote announcement.
At the moment there is
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Julio Costa Zambelli
julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote:
I was checking some papers at work today and accidentally found this license
violation (both Attribution and Share-Alike) by the RAND Corporation:
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 6:52 PM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Sorry that I come quite late with this, it might be too late, and it
was bothering me occasionally already for some months: if we really
decided in the future to change the license, isn't 3 weeks a little
short
On Fri, Mar 11, 2011 at 6:45 AM, M∡rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote:
Excuse me if this question has already been raised. I am currently
involved in a project that has chosen OSM as cartographic base for a
portal for tourists. There will be an ontology to allow for semantic
There have been previous discussions regarding per changeset relicensing.
I'd like to know if developing the tools to allow per changeset
relicensing is worthwhile. There will be some effort involved in the
coding, so it would be good to know in advance if this option will be
used by many or few
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 7:38 AM, Andrew wynnd...@lavabit.com wrote:
I hope there is no turf war brewing between Creative Commons and Open Data
Commons.
I wouldn't know. On the other hand, Mike Linksvayer, from Creative
Commons, joined the License Working Group conference call on 18 Jan
2011.
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Richard Masoner rmaso...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I'm a rank newbie at OSM, but getting into it because of my interest in
mapping bike facilities.
The US Rails to Trails Conservancy has an outstanding database of
bicycling trails. This Traillink database is the
On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 9:22 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
How charming that you use selective quoting to fabricate a lie of
omission. Viewing the original shows no lie. And that your
fabrication failed to gain traction the first time you trotted it out.
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
I recognise some of the names on that list. ;-)
- Rob.
Sure. And the typo as well. Everybody and their dog get the name wrong.
Right - OpenStreetMap
Wrong - Open Street Maps
Sigh.
On Wed, Nov 17, 2010 at 6:19 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
As a side note, if using ODbL, why not make the tiles public domain?
Indeed. But I think that you are right that this is a side note. Why
not start that discussion on the wiki, or in a separate thread here?
I've changed the
There have been several revisions to a new draft of the Contributor
Terms from the LWG over the last few meetings.
https://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_933xs7nvfb
Various draft versions have been around for a while. I think we've
improved the CT with each revision. LWG have had some
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 7:29 PM, Robin Paulson robin.paul...@gmail.com wrote:
the auckland city council has this as its copyright notice. how
compatible would this be with cc-by-sa, or odbl?
http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/en/pages/Copyrightstatement.aspx
if it isn't, which items are
On Mon, Oct 25, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de wrote:
I just answered a user's question on how to accept the new contributor
terms. I'll quote his statement here:
''How do we accept the new licence??'' JOSM sent me here but I cannot
find a way to accept the licence.
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:05 PM, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote:
- Original Message - From: M?rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com
To: Licensing and other legal discussions. legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 3:44 PM
Subject:
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
We must really endeavour to better enable people to draw in non-OSM data at
the rendering stage so that they don't feel tempted to drop their rubbish
into OSM just so that they get a nice map rendered.
Bravo.
On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Tyler Gunn ty...@egunn.com wrote:
Hello,
The Manitoba Lands Initiative has a wealth of data available on their
website, and I wanted to pass the license by everyone here. From what I
understand of it, using their data in OSM is perfectly fine.
Wow. Compared
Dear Eric,
Your replies from Grant (on the server team) and Emilie (OSMF Board
member) are from people who would normally deal with these issues.
;-)
As far as I know Map Maker does not use OSM data, but no consumer of
OSM data is obliged to tell OSM that they are using OSM data. They
are only
On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 1:12 PM, Eric Jarvies e...@csl.com.mx wrote:
On Sep 7, 2010, at 10:02 AM, Richard Weait wrote:
Also, as more data sets are opening up it is possible that Map Maker
and OSM editors are using similar sources.
Yes, I understand this and the context you are explaining
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 3:35 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 September 2010 17:30, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
only the most presumptuous person would believe that a license they choose
today will automatically be the best license for the project for all time.
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 4:01 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 1 September 2010 17:58, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
That you claim that Frederik, or LWG, or OSMF Board are are trying to
speak for both people now and people in the future in the very same
breath is bold
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 4:15 AM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Frederik's argument that we cannot predict what future generations will want
is quite fallacious.
Really? What will future generations want, 80n? I predict that
future generations will want Flying cars sure, but we were promised
On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 4:37 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, we contributors are being treated with contempt alright, besides
not being asked what we contributors want, since this whole thing
started it's been nothing but dirty tricks to try and get the license
changed.
Well we try to answer questions as quickly as possible. Some answers
depend on further meetings, others depend on replies from busy
professionals. Some answers get lost in the mundane reality of day to
day life.
Here are a couple of answers for questions that were asked a few weeks
back. Not
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 8:59 AM, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote:
In the implementation plan under phase 4 it asks Final cut-off. Community
Question... What do we do with the people who have Declined or not
responded? [1]
In order to speed up the final phases of the implementation
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 12:14 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 3:44 PM, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net
wrote:
1) Those who do not want to, or can not. agree to the CT's and make an
decision not to accept the CT's.
2) Those previous mappers who are no longer active
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 7:02 AM, Gregory Arenius greg...@arenius.com wrote:
I've been considering bringing in some of the data available at
http://www.datasf.org . Most of it is behind this clickthrough agreement:
http://gispub02.sfgov.org/website/sfshare/index2.asp . I think it would be
okay
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 7:58 PM, SomeoneElse
li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk wrote:
On 22/08/2010 15:27, Mike Collinson wrote:
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes or directly
https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1lVQlsnuEKPY2gjspScwHqgmo8RyoqmuaWWmWh58T4TY
0.1
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Brian Quinion
openstreet...@brian.quinion.co.uk wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Mike Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote:
If you support the share-alike concept, I urge you to accept the new
Contributor Terms which provides for a coherent Attribution,
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 8:10 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
John Smith wrote:
Any such mechanism, in my eyes, need not be 100% perfect; it is
sufficient
to make a honest attempt at doing the right thing, and if a few things
slip
through, then fix them in case of
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 9:00 AM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
If there is anything under development it would be good if we could see it.
It is unlikely to be a trivial piece of code and I'd be very surprised if it
can be developed by September 1st if it hasn't already been started.
You've
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 2:32 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
[ ... ]
September 1st represents
a reasonable timeframe, based on the currently published implementation plan
Dear 80n,
Absolutely not.
From the implementation plan. Phase 2 scheduled as 5 or 10 weeks.
Phase 3 as 8 weeks. Plus
On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Heiko Jacobs heiko.jac...@gmx.de wrote:
Hello
I searched without success in the Wiki
who official decided, when and *WHY* they decided, that data of
contributors, who not (can) accept the ODbl, has to be removed.
In
On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 7:55 PM, Matija Nalis mnalis-gm...@voyager.hr wrote:
On Fri, 23 Jul 2010 07:05:02 -0700 (PDT), Richard Fairhurst
rich...@systemed.net wrote:
TimSC wrote:
In that case, is it legally sound if I download my own contribution
due, to database rights?
Difficult to say -
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote:
On Sun, 11 Jul 2010, Kai Krueger wrote:
So far the the impressions I got from the members of the licensing group
vary from anywhere between e.g. 10% data loss is acceptable to as high as
90% data loss is acceptable (as long as a
On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 6:54 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
here's an interesting one.
Suppose OSM has just changed its license to ODbL. A final CC-BY-SA planet
has been released, non-relicensed data has been removed from the servers,
and the project is again humming
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 8:01 AM, James Livingston
li...@sunsetutopia.com wrote:
* Currently you can import any data with a compatible licence (e.g. CC-BY-SA,
CC-BY), you can't if we change without the copyright holder's permission
This is a tremendous improvement in my opinion. I'd like to
,
because the number of people is of little interest, it is the amount of
their contributions that matters.
I feel that the number of contributors is very important.
Secondly, I think Richard Weait found good words for this at SOTM: Nobody in
OSMF or the license working group wants to hurt OSM
On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 5:36 AM, visio...@petml.com wrote:
I'm trying to determine what is required of my company with regard to
the on-air broadcast of OSM data. I sell a product used in TV news. Part
of my product consists of maps. Sometimes my maps use OSM data. Not
always, in fact most
On Fri, May 21, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Mike Collinson m...@... writes:
- When enough contributors have agreed, we cut over to licensing the current
database under ODbL, (And a static snapshot of the database is also made
forever
under CC-BY-SA). If for some reason
Recent OSM-derived sites have included beautiful vanity logos on the
map. As an example, the recent isochronous map of Paris:
http://www.isokron.com/default/
Has a beautiful, bright isokron logo and link to their site. But I
wonder if this meets with the Prominence clause of our ccbysa license?
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
a recent discussion on talk-de has unearthed an interesting question
with regards to iPhone/Appstore and other locked platforms.
[... ]
Now, CC-BY-SA requires that whoever buys this application should have
the
On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 1:34 PM, F. Heinen f.heinen...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey Richard,
Thanks a lot for the response. I read (quickly) most of the documentation
already. Seems quite a lot of work
and study has been put into this. Good work OSMF!
But even when it seems this is all needed and
On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 3:09 PM, F. Heinen f.heinen...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
Let me first introduce myself, I am Frank aka Frenzel. I am a community
member of OSM.nl since Aug. 2009, so relatively new but also quite active.
I hope I mail this to the right mailing list.
Hi Frank,
I'm
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 7:47 AM, Stefano Salvador
stefano.salva...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
I tried to send this to the foundation but I got no response, so I'm trying
here.
During an edit session I noticed a number of errors near my living
area [1]. Comparing the area with GMaps [2] reveals too
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 7:40 AM, mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk wrote:
Hi,
A quick question for the legal people: does ODbL allow the project to
be forked?
Why not?
The code is in svn and has been for ages, ready for forking. Of
course, you can't change the license on the GPL code that you
On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 4:01 AM, Andy Robinson ajrli...@googlemail.com wrote:
But maybe if you chat to them they might consider releasing to OSM under a
modified license to get around this?
Of course. In progress. ;-)
___
legal-talk mailing list
Dear legal-talk,
I wonder if either cc-by-sa, or ODbL anticipate a reciprocal data
agreement between OSM and another project with a different license?
Imagine a data provider using perhaps cc-by, or a BSD style permissive
license contributes their data to OSM.
Imagine then that they would like
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Jeff Pricejeff.pr...@rocketmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I approached my local council some months ago enquiring about access to
their road data and recently gained a in principle agreement for shapefile
content via cdrom. While I explained the creative commons
On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 8:21 AM, Algirdas
Mockusalgirdas.moc...@gmail.com wrote:
Hy everybody,
Our company is planning to use Marble widget in commercial product. As you
know Marble is licensed under LGPL v2 license, that permits its usage in
commercial closed source apps. I have a question
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
88 matches
Mail list logo
