On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 3:04 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
If it were any different, you could team up with a co-publisher, publish
your ODbL Produced Works to him and he forwards them to the world without
you ever having to release anything. It would be a loophole that demands
Hi,
On 22.07.2012 00:22, Paul Norman wrote:
If CC4 comes out with such indiscrimante inclusion of database rights
then my guess is that it will either be automatically impossible to
licene Produced Works under CC, or we will have to explicitly disallow
it.
I'm not sure who you mean by we in
Hi,
On 22.07.2012 08:43, Eugene Alvin Villar wrote:
So, conveying your work to a
another entity and not the general public does not count as
publishing.
I think that as far as viral licenses are concerned, the public is
anyone who is not yourself, or part of your own organisation.
I think
Hi legal-talk,
I have a couple of questions about the use of map images, which I
understand to be ODbL Produced Works, in Wikipedia. I've tried to
find answers on the OSM wiki but I haven't seen anything addressing
them.
1. The attribution requirement. ODbL says:
4.3 Notice for using output
Hi,
On 21.07.2012 20:18, Mike Dupont wrote:
No. The Produced Work you create is uploaded to Wikipedia under
CC-BY-SA and that's all that counts. CC-BY-SA would not allow
additional conditions (e.g. the making available of a source
database) anyway. The Created from OdBL-licensed
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
(If anyone wants to pursue this discussion I would very much ask them to
peruse the mailing list archives with the search term reverse engineering
and read up on past discussions so that we don't have to repeat
Hi again,
On 21 July 2012 20:10, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
On 21.07.2012 18:19, Adrian Frith wrote:
Do we really have to include the full notice Contains information from
OpenStreetMap, which is made available here under the Open Database
License (ODbL) in the caption of every
On 21.07.2012 20:10, Frederik Ramm wrote:
On 21.07.2012 18:19, Adrian Frith wrote:
Do we really have to include the full notice Contains information from
OpenStreetMap, which is made available here under the Open Database
License (ODbL) in the caption of every use of an OSM-derived map in a
Hi,
On 21.07.2012 20:44, Adrian Frith wrote:
Does this mean that, in my scenario, the only recipient to whom I have
an obligation under ODbL sec. 4.6 is the Wikimedia Foundation?
Everyone else who receives it receives it from WMF under CC-BY-SA and
they have no claim on me?
This is an
Hi,
On 21 July 2012 21:04, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
On 21.07.2012 20:44, Adrian Frith wrote:
If it were any different, you could team up with a co-publisher, publish
your ODbL Produced Works to him and he forwards them to the world without
you ever having to release anything.
Hi,
On 21.07.2012 21:33, Paul Norman wrote:
CC 4.0 licenses explicitly include database rights (sec. 1 (b) of draft 1).
How will this work when 4.0 is published and CC BY-SA tiles include the
database rights?
Also an interesting question but one that would probably have to be
addressed to
From: Frederik Ramm [mailto:frede...@remote.org]
Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2012 2:30 PM
To: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Some questions about using ODbL Produced
Work maps in Wikipedia
Hi,
On 21.07.2012 21:33, Paul Norman wrote:
CC 4.0 licenses explicitly
12 matches
Mail list logo
