Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
you'd happily support distributing the data under a license which is
not likely to protect it?
I happily support the status quo, where map data is freely available
under CC share-alike terms, and I see no evidence of evil mapmakers copying
it with impunity.
I
Ed,
I don't quite follow your logic.
You seem to be saying:
1. there is no proof that CC-BY-SA doesn't work;
2. there is danger that anything based on contract law weakens the
protection we have for our data (because breach of contract doesn't give
us a strong handle)
3. you accept that
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
you'd happily support distributing the data under a license which is
not likely to protect it?
I happily support the status quo, where map data is freely available
under CC share-alike terms,
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
I happily support the status quo, where map data is freely available
under CC share-alike terms, and I see no evidence of evil mapmakers copying
it with impunity.
absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, and so forth
If someone is taking OSM data and
Frederik Ramm frede...@... writes:
You seem to be saying:
1. there is no proof that CC-BY-SA doesn't work;
2. there is danger that anything based on contract law weakens the
protection we have for our data (because breach of contract doesn't give
us a strong handle)
3. you accept that
Hi,
Ed Avis wrote:
if we carry on licensing CC BY-SA we may get to the state where CC
BY-SA is challenged. if the challenge is in the US, i think there's a
good chance of OSMF losing,
Would that be such a disaster? If such a precedent were set, then any
factual data derived from OSM would
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
If someone is taking OSM data and misusing it secretly, then they would
be able to continue doing that whatever licence was chosen. So we only
need to consider cases where a violation becomes publicly known.
my point was more like there's no evidence yet. just
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
Dr Evil doesn't need an unlimited legal budget - he just needs to live
in a country where non-creative data isn't copyrightable.
...and in a country where it is crystal clear that the OSM data is
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Even if you agree that CC-BY-SA is less than ideal,
It's not less than ideal. It's dreadful. The OSMF license team have
created a document explaining why. We've had lawyers confirming that
it probably doesn't work. Even the
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 1:47 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Remember, though, that there are huge transaction costs associated with any
licence switch. Even if you agree that CC-BY-SA is less than ideal, it might
be better than deleting big chunks out of the database and alienating
Hi,
Andy Allan wrote:
That is, Creative Commons have advised
us, and everyone else, to not use CCBYSA for data. It doesn't come
more plain than that.
I would very much appreciate if *everyone* who invokes Creative Commons
saying that CC-BY-SA is not suitable for data would also add the
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 2:28 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I'm not saying that Creative Commons are always right, but trying to
make it sound as if they were endorsing OdBL is a bit heavy.
I'm not sure where I mentioned the OdBL? I'm just trying to make the
point to Ed that his
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
there has been some FUD about these deletions of data. let me say it
here: no data will be deleted. if the re-licensing goes ahead then all
of the data that everyone has contributed would be made available
through dumps.
Right. I think everyone understands that,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 2:40 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
I'd be a lot more persuaded if there were evidence of a real, occurring
problem rather than a theoretical one.
[snip]
Or in other words, you still believe the the CC-BY-SA license is fine,
all the re-licensing stuff isn't
On 28/10/09 14:40, Ed Avis wrote:
But strong claims require strong evidence. To claim that CC-BY-SA is
'dreadful' requires, IMHO, evidence of real rather than theoretical cases
where it's holding back the goal of free map data. You might tell me that
the fence around my field is completely
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
we at the LWG have been working very hard to produce the
license that we think the majority of OSM contributors want. a large
amount of previous discussion on this and the talk MLs has suggested
Hi,
Ed Avis wrote:
In general, the ideal licence would not need to be fully watertight in
all jurisdictions, but only strong enough to provide a good deterrent
in practice for most individuals and companies.
What would you want to deter them from?
Bye
Frederik
Tom Hughes t...@... writes:
But strong claims require strong evidence. To claim that CC-BY-SA is
'dreadful' requires, IMHO, evidence of real rather than theoretical cases
where it's holding back the goal of free map data. You might tell me that
the fence around my field is completely
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 3:24 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
let's say, for a moment, that CC BY-SA definitely doesn't work and
isn't an option. what would you do? if you'd move to a new license,
which license?
I would prefer one which is CC-compatible,
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
In my ideal ponies world the database itself would be CC-compatible, so
people could generate excerpts ('list of all pubs in Swindon') and include
that in CC works.
would the list of all pubs in Swindon be a database, or a produced
work? if it's included,
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
these sites are in non-compliance with the license
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution
Would switching to ODBL (or any licence) solve this particular problem?
in any case, it's not useful to talk about people stealing the data
- anyone
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
let's assume some data are taken and modified and used to generate
tiles. the ODbL would require that the modified data are made
available, regardless of the license of the tiles. if the data were
effectively-PD then there would be no requirement to make the
On 10/28/09, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
let's assume some data are taken and modified and used to generate
tiles. the ODbL would require that the modified data are made
available, regardless of the license of the tiles. if the data were
effectively-PD then
On 10/28/09, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
these sites are in non-compliance with the license
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution
Would switching to ODBL (or any licence) solve this particular problem?
quite possibly, since ODbL
Frederik Ramm frede...@... writes:
Indeed, there are in fact people who have gone on record saying they
will stop contributing, and remove their previous contributions, if OSM
were to become a PD project.
But presumably nobody who will stop contributing if OSM continues to be
licensed under
On 27/10/09 11:04, Ed Avis wrote:
Frederik Rammfrede...@... writes:
Again, is there any evidence (rather than just repetition of the same
opinions) that in some country, OSM data is effectively in the public
domain?
If your question is: Has anybody ever used OSM data without regard to
On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 1:06 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
Matt Amos zerebub...@... writes:
[CC-BY-SA unclear, or not permissive enough?]
We know for a fact that a number of people (especially people that have
asked their lawyers for an opinion) have indeed decided not to use our
data
Hi,
Matt Amos wrote:
ODbL does exactly this: it is a copyright and database rights license,
Can you explain this some more. I thought the copyright aspect was
explicitly not covering the content (a fact that was actually critisised
by a legal reviewer who found it too clumsy to have an extra
One issue which I don't think has been raised so far is whether the
ODBL's use of contract law as an enforcement mechanism might in fact
make it harder to enforce.
In common-law countries the remedy for breach of contract is damages.
For something like OSM which is distributed free of charge, it
Hi,
Ed Avis wrote:
This is where I disagree (or at least, am unpersuaded so far) since I
haven't seen any hard evidence that copyright is inadequate. If this were
the case, then there would be no need for anybody to give permission for
relicensing, since under the current copyright-only
30 matches
Mail list logo
