you actually look at other map providers, which is what
we absolutely don't want in the first place.
Emilie Laffray
2009/8/12 John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com
I tried to search the list archives before posting but couldn't see
anything about this.
The problem is people noticing non-existant
some scenarios.
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
that someone with more legal experience will correct me there if I am
wrong.
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
2009/9/17 Barnett, Phillip phillip.barn...@itn.co.uk
Although it's just occurred to me that Microsoft license their data from
someone else (TeleAtlas?) so I'm surprised they get the onscreen credit,
rather than the original supplier.
Navteq for Microsoft.
Emilie Laffray
can't even find how you get on the LWG in the
first place.
You get on the mailing by asking the phone number and the time of the next
conference call.
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org
out previously that all map providers
are using contract law to restrict their data not copyrights.
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
On 19 July 2010 22:07, Simon Ward si...@bleah.co.uk wrote:
On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:45:46AM +0100, Emilie Laffray wrote:
Or contract law. It has been pointed out previously that all map
providers
are using contract law to restrict their data not copyrights.
Just because everyone else
the concept of moral
rights cannot be removed from someone. Copyrights and other intellectual
property mechanisms will vary very strongly between countries.
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http
examples with real examples
instead of some really far fetched scenarios that are unlikely to happen in
the first place. I don't know of any sane project that would licence code
under CC-BY-SA in the first place.
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk mailing list
On 1 September 2010 09:53, Mikel Maron mikel_ma...@yahoo.com wrote:
PLEASE
Indeed.
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
too), not for sending anonymous abusive emails to and/or
regarding other people in the community.
Comment greatly appreciated.
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
that they are talking about maps as images but IANAL.
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
that if
it was that simple you wouldn't need to ask the LWG in the first place.
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
is why I
asked if Google is now using OSM data.
I think that even an example would be nice, so more people can have a look
at what is happening. It would be best if we realized what is going on
sooner rather than later.
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk
On 17 November 2010 10:46, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
'other such free and open licence' should change to 'licence(s)'.
I think we should keep the free and open as it clears any ambiguities about
OSMF potentially going rogue and imposing a proprietary licence (not that I
see that
On 17 November 2010 11:00, Emilie Laffray emilie.laff...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 November 2010 10:46, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote:
'other such free and open licence' should change to 'licence(s)'.
I think we should keep the free and open as it clears any ambiguities about
OSMF
On 23 November 2010 11:33, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed, using something that is so novel and untested as ODbL to license
OSM's work is foolish. Especially given that copyright as applied to maps
is well established and have been in use for a couple of hundred years.
Dear Etienne,
to a PD or
an attribution licence. In any case, I don't particularly care but I will
respect the spirit of the initial licence (i.e. SA).
Emilie Laffray
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Hello,
In addition, the LWG is going to have a look at the terms for the same
reason.
Emilie Laffray
On 1 December 2010 16:07, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 12/01/2010 02:31 PM, David Groom wrote:
- Original Message - From: Anthony o...@inbox.org
Isn't http
Hello,
just transmitting the answer officially.
Emilie Laffray
On 10 February 2011 16:53, Antony Pegg wrote:
Thanks emilie, hi John
Yes absolutely fine to trace over. Or on a website. Or cache in a mobile
app...or print out, roll it up and smoke it if you want - the imagery is
totally
20 matches
Mail list logo
