On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 12:57:19PM +1000, John Smith wrote:
I don't think intent alone is enough, if the intent is to limit
derivative copies you need to stipulate that in your license to B,
otherwise you know that C is able to do what ever he likes based on
the license between B and C.
I
On 21 June 2011 05:46, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Hang on, here's Nearmap's statement: All such additions or edits
submitted to OSM prior to 17 June 2011 may be held and continue to be
used by OSM under the terms in place between OSM and the individual
which submitted the
[Sorry to quote so much context - please do scroll down!)
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:16:03AM +0100, Robert Whittaker (OSM) wrote:
I think the question being asked arises from the following
hypothetical chain of events:
1/ Person A has a database that he licenses under ODbL.
2/ Person B
On 21 June 2011 23:31, Stephen Gower socks-openstreetmap@earth.li wrote:
[Sorry to quote so much context - please do scroll down!)
On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 11:16:03AM +0100, Robert Whittaker (OSM) wrote:
I think the question being asked arises from the following
hypothetical chain of
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:57 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
Person A also should do as much as they can to make sure any potential
Person C is aware of the intention. In the case of OSM, it helps that
it's
the largest open map data project - it's likely anyone thinking of
Hang on, here's Nearmap's statement: All such additions or edits
submitted to OSM prior to 17 June 2011 may be held and continue to be
used by OSM under the terms in place between OSM and the individual
which submitted the addition or edit at the relevant time.
And here's Nick's interpretation:
19 juni 2011 6:59
Aan: Licensing and other legal discussions.
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [talk-au] Statement from nearmap.com
regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap
On 19 June 2011 03:40, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote
On 19 June 2011 19:55, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote:
I just wanted to make clear that our current data
is submitted under CC-BY-SA (at least our community members declares so)
but there is absolutely no prove that the data submitted
can be CC-BY-SA.
On 18 June 2011 10:22, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote:
OK. So what I mean by some of the questions don't make sense is
exactly this. I'm afraid you and lots of others who ask questions use
a lot of short-hand (lawyers sometimes do this too). The problem is
then I don't know what
On 19 June 2011 20:16, Robert Whittaker (OSM)
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote:
Thinking of the example someone gave or the copyright in sound
recordings being separate from the copyright in the music / lyrics,
I'm guessing the answer is some sort of combination of 2 and 3; along
the lines
On 18 June 2011 11:37, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 June 2011 20:35, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Not sure of you point, since cc-by-sa can't be magically turned into
ODBL data, it can only stay cc-by-sa.
Oh and as for CTs, they don't guarantee attribution
On 19 June 2011 11:21, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 June 2011 20:16, Robert Whittaker (OSM)
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote:
Thinking of the example someone gave or the copyright in sound
recordings being separate from the copyright in the music / lyrics,
I'm
On 19 June 2011 20:24, Robert Whittaker (OSM)
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 June 2011 11:37, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 June 2011 20:35, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Not sure of you point, since cc-by-sa can't be magically turned into
ODBL
On 19 June 2011 20:31, Robert Whittaker (OSM)
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote:
While person C could indeed get access to the original data (which
must be offered by B), in the hypothetical situation I envisaged, they
choose not to do so. They obtain the produced work under PD/CC0 or
CC-By
On 19 June 2011 12:31, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19 June 2011 20:24, Robert Whittaker (OSM)
robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 June 2011 11:37, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 June 2011 20:35, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
Not sure
On 19 June 2011 23:20, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
I think what Robert is trying to say is that you only have to check
for compatibility with the current license. But the current license
is CC-By-SA, so CC-By-SA data would be okay.
Since things seem to be going head first
I forgot to ask, do SVG files constitute a produced work?
The kind OSM.org currently outputs as SVG maps.
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
On 20 June 2011 00:53, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote:
On 19 June 2011 12:31, John Smithdeltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
yet ODBL allows people to output PD tiles,
which don't offer attribution.
The ODbL requires attribution of the database.
The database can contain other attribution.
On 20 June 2011 00:55, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.com wrote:
If however on the other hand if someone created an SVG file specially
for the purpose of extracted OSM data and tags, it would be extremely
difficult for them to argue that is a produced work and not a
database.
That's
JohnSmitty wrote:
As I said before, you can easily do this with copyright, use CC-by-ND
instead of CC-by-SA, but if something is licensed as CC-by-SA it can
legally be derived from as long as the resulting work is also
CC-by-SA.
What I am saying is that Creative Commons guidance appears to
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 signatory to Berne which includes the US and
the EU. What you can do with
2011/6/18 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
Well one assumption I'm making is that everyone is adhering to the
license restrictions placed on them, perhaps this would be easiler
with a solid example.
OSM-F continues to distribute map tiles under a CC-by-SA license and
for the purpose of
On 18 June 2011 19:48, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote:
2011/6/18 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
Well one assumption I'm making is that everyone is adhering to the
license restrictions placed on them, perhaps this would be easiler
with a solid example.
OSM-F continues 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
Hi,
Richard Weait wrote:
Andy, in Australia, contributes CC-By or CC-By-SA data to CC-By-SA
OpenStreetMap. Perhaps the data is Australian boundaries or
something.
Betty, in UK, creates CC-By-SA tiles that include that boundary data.
Chuck, in USA, creates vectors from those tiles and later
On 18 June 2011 20:26, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Is this similar?:
Andy, in Australia, contributes CC-By or CC-By-SA data to CC-By-SA
OpenStreetMap. Perhaps the data is Australian boundaries or
something.
Betty, in UK, creates CC-By-SA tiles that include that boundary data.
On 18 June 2011 20:35, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 June 2011 20:26, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Is this similar?:
Andy, in Australia, contributes CC-By or CC-By-SA data to CC-By-SA
OpenStreetMap. Perhaps the data is Australian boundaries or
something.
]
Verzonden: zaterdag 18 juni 2011 12:36
Aan: Licensing and other legal discussions.
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [talk-au] Statement from nearmap.com
regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap
On 18 June 2011 20:26, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
Is this similar
On 19 June 2011 03:40, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen
g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote:
What if Betty changes country and decides to reside in France -before-
publicating
her tiles on a server located in the Bahama's and claiming CC0
;)
It's silly because some people injected a
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
The goal of that statement was to allow any contributions that have been
derived from our PhotoMaps under our current licence (which is what imposes
the CC-BY-SA redistribution condition) can remain in the OSM db. Not being
Hi,
On 06/17/11 11:18, John Smith wrote:
Only if the amount of data traced is not substantial.
CC-by-SA makes no such distinction, it's either cc-by-sa or it's not
cc-by-sa, so which license can tiles be put under?
Sorry, I thought you had asked about tracing from tiles.
Tiles can be put
On 18 June 2011 00:06, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
On 06/17/11 11:18, John Smith wrote:
Only if the amount of data traced is not substantial.
CC-by-SA makes no such distinction, it's either cc-by-sa or it's not
cc-by-sa, so which license can tiles be put under?
Sorry, I
On 18 June 2011 00:54, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:44 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 18 June 2011 00:40, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I am not trying to apply patents to OSM. I am trying to use the example of
patents
Because you want to sell/offer s service in the EU, enter one of the
countries and numerous other reasons. As long as you don't make the
derived database available or publish the contents in some form -in- the
EU you are not in trouble, just if.
Simon
Am 17.06.2011 16:54, schrieb John
On 18 June 2011 01:10, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote:
Because you want to sell/offer s service in the EU, enter one of the
countries and numerous other reasons. As long as you don't make the derived
database available or publish the contents in some form -in- the EU you are
not in trouble,
On 17 June 2011 16:48, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
On 06/17/11 16:39, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
1. IIRC the newer versions of CC-By-SA include statements to ensure
that the content is not protected by database rights, patents or DRM,
which would prevent their uses.
News to me.
On 17 June 2011 17:17, andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com wrote:
On 17 June 2011 16:48, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
On 06/17/11 16:39, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
1. IIRC the newer versions of CC-By-SA include statements to ensure
that the content is not protected by database
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:01 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 18 June 2011 00:54, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:44 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 18 June 2011 00:40, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I am
On 18 June 2011 05:25, davespod osmli...@dellams.fastmail.fm wrote:
In a similar vein, I think OSMF and any other publisher of OSM-derived map
tiles under CC-by-SA would be well advised to be explicit about what it is
they are licensing under CC-by-SA. In other words, they should follow the
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com wrote:
James; all I can say is that the paragraph in question was written by our
General Counsel specifically to allow existing contributions to stay in
place. I'm not a lawyer, so I can't comment on interpretation!
Regards
Hi
- Original Message -
From: Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com
To: OpenStreetMap Learned Discussions t...@openstreetmap.org; OSM
Australian Talk List talk...@openstreetmap.org; Licensing and other
legal discussions. legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2011 2:30 AM
Subject:
- Original Message -
From: Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com
To: David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net; OSM Australian Talk List
talk...@openstreetmap.org; Licensing and other legal discussions.
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 12:48 AM
Subject: Re: [talk-au]
42 matches
Mail list logo
