On 09/12/2009, at 11:46 AM, Anthony wrote:
A transfer of copyright is a transfer of exclusive rights. In the US, and
probably in other jurisdictions as well, it must be signed and in writing.
One key difference is that someone who is granted a nonexclusive license does
not have the power
On 11/12/09 10:26, James Livingston wrote:
* You wouldn't be able to use data you personally collected, except under the
ODbL (the last part of the second sentence on the second paragraph above).
I believe that the FSF copyright assignment scheme licences your work
back to you once you sign
2009/12/11 James Livingston doc...@mac.com:
Some other potential points against using copyright transfer:
* Given one of the arguments against CC-BY-SA is that in some jurisdictions
the data isn't subject to copyright, copyright assignment of the data would
be a bit questionable.
* Businesses
David Groom schrieb:
The first time I access the database [definition (1)] then, for as long as
the database is directly accessible, am I not being granted a right to
continue to access it under the terms existing when I first accessed it?
No, the license gives you the right to Use the
On 12/12/2009, at 7:07 AM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
But if the foundation wants to have copyright in the data I think
it's trivial for it to have some by doing *some* of the maintenance
edits on behalf of the foundation or one person (or more) transferring
their rights instead of everyone
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 9:03 PM, James Livingston doc...@mac.com wrote:
2) One or more contributors suing for copyright infringement - one of the
things that ODbL supposedly fixes is being sued for this by individual
contributors, so lets discount it for now.
The ODbL doesn't cover the
On 09/12/09 09:48, Ed Avis wrote:
A related question is that if a fork happened, could it then be merged back
into the main OSM project?
Just like any other ODbL contribution, this could only be done if the
contributors signed the Contributor Terms, or the OSMF agreed to waive
the signing of
On 08/12/09 15:14, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
Right, so this is one thing that isn't being made so clear. It's been
said multiple times that the ODbL transition in summary is the spirit
of CC-By-SA taken and made into a proper license for a database. But
actually it's the spirit of CC-By-SA +
