On 25 Oct 2008, at 11:56, Frederik Ramm wrote:
What I don't like about share-alike is the small-minded attempt to
codify this
giving away into something legally binding. To me, this is deeply
based
in a negativist, paranoid world view where everyone is out to cheat
you.
... which is
There is talk underway to do so.
However, many of us feel that splitting the user base and splitting
contributions would be destructive. We could produce better maps if we
cooperated.
Don't you agree?
-J
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 11:47 AM, SteveC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I ever start a open
Steve,
SteveC wrote:
Guys OSM isn't going PD...
Who can say? OSM goes where the community wants it to. You were present
at SOTM 07; do you remember the show of hands when people were asked
what they think about PD? That the Foundation is investigating
share-alike licenses and not PD is due
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 12:02:26PM -0700, Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
From what I understand, under the new license, any dataset that we
build in-house based on the geometry or tags of data in the
transportation layer, which we choose to release to our client or
other parties, would have to be
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 08:43:17AM +0200, bvh wrote:
That is not true. As long as you base your work solely on your own data,
you are free to do with it as you seek. Even after having uploaded it
under the proposed license.
(Not taking into account how the licence sees it at all.)
Not really,
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 07:36:08AM -0700, Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
Richard wrote: One thing I really love about OSM is the pragmatic,
un-political
approach: You don't give us your data, fine, then we create our own and
you can shove it.
(I don’t see Richard’s original email, so I’ll reply
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 10:32 AM, Richard Fairhurst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Liz wrote:
I don't want PD for my data because then I can see the company like
Garmin
freely using it to update their maps and still charging me for my
data.
But this is what I never get when people wheel out the
Liz wrote:
I don't want PD for my data because then I can see the company like
Garmin
freely using it to update their maps and still charging me for my
data.
But this is what I never get when people wheel out the old canard of
the tragedy of the commons. These days, the commons is
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 09:01:25AM +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Guys OSM isn't going PD...
Who can say? OSM goes where the community wants it to. You were present
at SOTM 07; do you remember the show of hands when people were asked
what they think about PD?
It was pretty much 50:50,
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 10:11 AM, Jukka Rahkonen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It would be annoying to contribute first to PD and then separately to
OpenStreetMap-share alike, but I am not astonished if that will be the only
way
to support both PD and OSM. It is a pity that I do not have local
bvh wrote:
If garmin closes their devices for non-garmin signed datasets (ala
TomTom) then you could very well end up paying for the privilege to use
your own data.
Sure, but that's an utterly different issue - that's an issue about
whether or not Garmin allows third-party maps to be
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 01:26:20PM +0100, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
bvh wrote:
If garmin closes their devices for non-garmin signed datasets (ala
TomTom) then you could very well end up paying for the privilege to use
your own data.
Sure, but that's an utterly different issue - that's
Joseph wrote: Option 0: The OSM database has an added 'license' tag
and the map can
be viewed and edited through a PD filter. A second set of map tiles
will need to be rendered. Any data edited in PD mode will (by default)
have a PD tag applied. Stuff like TIGER can be thrown directly into
the
What about a yahoo discussin group for OSM-PD? Would anyone object to that?
Landon
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 8:02 AM, Tom Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
Does anyone have the e-mail address for Tom Hughes so I could request
the creation of a public domain mailing list
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 08:19:50PM +0100, Brian Quinion wrote:
Personally I'd be very happy to see the discussion of PD continue on
the talk list but a mailing list seems a very minor resource compared
to the time and effort that have gone into the creating the new
license.
I see the PD route
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 10:55 AM, Simon Ward [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 08:19:50PM +0100, Brian Quinion wrote:
Personally I'd be very happy to see the discussion of PD continue on
the talk list but a mailing list seems a very minor resource compared
to the time and effort
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 11:17:35AM +1100, Joseph Gentle wrote:
I intended to have an overlay on my map which showed bus stops. This
data would be collected from the local bus company.
Under the old license, I couldn't use OSM because I couldn't share the
overlay. It might not have been a
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 11:40 AM, Ian Sergeant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why can't we just be happen to produce maps and data people will want to
use?
Ian.
We already produce maps and data people want to use.
I also want the maps and data to be under a license which lets them be
used. (More.)
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 1:44 AM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
80n wrote:
IMHO, PD weakens OSM and weakens its ability to free up other datasets.
I don't see the ability to free up other datasets as central to OSM,
and as such, weakening this ability does not IMHO weaken OSM.
Does anyone have the e-mail address for Tom Hughes so I could request
the creation of a public domain mailing list for OSM? Is there a more
appropriate way to handle this request?
Thanks,
The Sunburned Surveyor
___
legal-talk mailing list
[EMAIL
Tom,
Many OSM contributors indicated that they are interested in a PD alternative
(Richard, Frederik, myself etc). I believe that having a PD database
(subset) many have a few applications. Like showcasing OSM on website where
a viral license will be an issue. Google Earth etc.
We all want to
Hi,
Tom Hughes wrote:
I'm not hard to find... I'm also not the right person to create mailing
lists now though ;-) You want Mike Collinson for that.
Good to know, I've been sending people your way all the time ;-)
Is this PD thing actually OSM though, or something outside of/parallel
to
Nic Roets wrote:
Many OSM contributors indicated that they are interested in a PD
alternative (Richard, Frederik, myself etc). I believe that having a PD
database (subset) many have a few applications. Like showcasing OSM on
website where a viral license will be an issue. Google Earth etc.
Tom,
You wrote: No, but some of us are trying to work to achieve the best consensus
possible within the existing project while others appear to be trying to
fragment the project.
I don't think there has been a decision by any of us to fork OSM or
to fragment the community. I believe there is a
Well, as Frederik noted in the other thread, keeping it low key is best. I'm
thinking parallel database running the same toolchain. No tools for
automatically propagating to the main database.
I'm not trying to fragment the project and I'm hoping no-one else is. I'm
trying to maximize the value
I think the concerns about fragmenting OSM are valid. The problem with
two databases and two toolchains is that you've just cut the
collaborative power of OSM in half. I really think a situation in
which all OSM users get to benefit from the PD data will be best. This
will really make the whole
Tom Hughes wrote:
We all want to improve OSM data quantity and quality. We just haven't
agreed on weather a viral license will help or hinder. Just like we
haven't agreed on JOSM vs. Potlatch.
No, but some of us are trying to work to achieve the best consensus
possible within the existing
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 11:17:35AM +1100, Joseph Gentle wrote:
councils, proprietary satnav systems, google earth, etc. I don't think
I’d rather people didn’t make their stuff proprietary at all. PD
doesn’t encourage it, but doesn’t discourage it either. Share-alike
discourages it, and that’s
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:02 AM, Tom Hughes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is this PD thing actually OSM though, or something outside of/parallel
to OSM? I don't quite understand at the moment how to whole thing is
intended to work to be honest.
We're still talking about it; hence the request for a
Guys OSM isn't going PD... can't you go start
ReallyFreeAndOpenStreetMap.org or something?
Best
Steve
On 21 Oct 2008, at 07:33, Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
Does anyone have the e-mail address for Tom Hughes so I could request
the creation of a public domain mailing list for OSM? Is there a
30 matches
Mail list logo
