2010/8/10 Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com:
I like this test because it will make things easy. No fuzzy shades of grey
like
some Richard is suggesting. Can you give an example of a thing that is done
by a
human being and that is not art by this definition?
Humans create many non-art
2010/8/10 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com
wrote:
I like this test because it will make things easy. No fuzzy shades of grey
like
some Richard is suggesting. Can you give an example of a thing that is done
by a
human being and
Anthony schrieb:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Robert Kaiserka...@kairo.at wrote:
As Matt noted, there's a growing legal opinion that our current data is in
fact in the PD, as the CC-BY-SA can't be legally applied to it. Is that the
state you want to have in the future?
Better than it
Ok, the chilean and the brazilian imports differ in the base license, giving
the brazilian imports a head start ahead of chilean in the race for the new
license.
AFAICT all the brazilian imports are PD, and conditions have been very
simple, as giving a way of pointing to sorce data (i.e. source=
Anthony wrote:
What about a tracing of a photograph of a flower? [...]
What about a tracing of a photograph of a lake, as viewed from
an aircraft?
Bauman v Fussell may be relevant here.
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
80n wrote:
Why don't you try this. Import some Ordnance Survey Street View data
into OSM, then render it as a Produced Work with the ODbL required
attribution
I've written fairly extensively on this in talk-gb, but to reiterate a
posting from May:
To comply with ODbL for data obtained
80n wrote:
This is quite a good place to start:
http://itlaw.wikia.com/wiki/Copyright_protection_of_databases
It's good to see licence sceptics starting to look at the case law too.
There are of course a million things you could say about rights pertaining
to factual compilations in the US.
2010/8/10 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org
Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org writes:
Any license that tries to use this patchy copyright protection of data
is bound to be unfair at the very least, and more likely a pain the
behind of anybody who wants to use it. The legality of OSM use cases
would depend on whether you execute a
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com wrote:
Map is a hand-written 2D picture of the world. It is definitely more a
kind of art than a digital photo in flickr, there is more subjectivity
and intelligence etc needed to make it.
How can photos be copyrighted?
2010/8/10 Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com:
Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org writes:
Any license that tries to use this patchy copyright protection of data
is bound to be unfair at the very least, and more likely a pain the
behind of anybody who wants to use it. The legality of OSM use cases
would
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com
wrote:
Map is a hand-written 2D picture of the world. It is definitely more a
kind of art than a digital photo in flickr, there is more subjectivity
and
Jaak Laineste jaak.laineste at gmail.com writes:
I don't really see how someone can even have the idea (or argument)
that map is just a database of facts.
I'd suggest a simple technical test for is X an art or fact.
1. ask two persons to create the X.
2. store it to a digital file, and
On 10 August 2010 22:09, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like this approach too: each country should be able to decide
license terms. Communities are different, population/contributor
densities are very different, laws are different. Would it be really
practical, and how it
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 8:09 AM, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com wrote:
2010/8/10 Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com:
Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org writes:
Any license that tries to use this patchy copyright protection of data
is bound to be unfair at the very least, and more likely a pain
Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
I like this test because it will make things easy. No fuzzy shades of grey
like some Richard is suggesting.
I'm not suggesting, I'm reporting. You might like things to be easy but that
isn't the way the law works... or we wouldn't have been having this
discussion for the
Richard Fairhurst richard at systemed.net writes:
Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
I like this test because it will make things easy. No fuzzy shades of grey
like some Richard is suggesting.
I'm not suggesting, I'm reporting. You might like things to be easy but that
isn't the way the law works...
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 4:36 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Anthony wrote:
What about a tracing of a photograph of a flower? [...]
What about a tracing of a photograph of a lake, as viewed from
an aircraft?
Bauman v Fussell may be relevant here.
Not particularly. The
I like this test because it will make things easy. No fuzzy shades of grey
like
some Richard is suggesting. Can you give an example of a thing that is done
by a
human being and that is not art by this definition?
Humans create many non-art things. For example databases it
human-created
The question I'm asking (which you chopped out of the quote) is
whether or not the tracing is copyrightable.
Automatic tracing is not copyrightable by the tracer, according to the
test. What was copyrightable is the aerial image, and automatic
tracing is just a way of making a specific copy of
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Jaak Laineste jaak.laine...@gmail.com wrote:
I like this test because it will make things easy. No fuzzy shades of grey
like
some Richard is suggesting. Can you give an example of a thing that is done
by a
human being and that is not art by this definition?
Anthony schrieb:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Matt Amoszerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Anthonyo...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Matt Amoszerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
the ODbL is the only example i know of.
That's certainly a reason to be
On Tue, Aug 10, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
As Matt noted, there's a growing legal opinion that our current data is in
fact in the PD, as the CC-BY-SA can't be legally applied to it. Is that the
state you want to have in the future?
Better than it being under ODbL.
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 12:58 AM, Erik Johansson e...@kth.se wrote:
2010/8/8 Dirk-Lüder Kreie osm-l...@deelkar.net:
Am 08.08.2010 16:59, schrieb John Smith:
On 9 August 2010 00:58, Erik Johansson e...@kth.se wrote:
Australia 2 people per km^2
Sweden 21 people per km^2
Canada is ~3
Am 08.08.2010 23:10, schrieb Liz:
On Mon, 9 Aug 2010, Cartinus wrote:
It doesn't take as many manhours to map a desert as it takes to map
downtown Melbourne.
Cartinus
Please don't come up with this sort of nonsense
Well, a Desert usually has much less features than urban terrain, so I
don't
On 08/08/2010 22:10, Liz wrote:
On Mon, 9 Aug 2010, Cartinus wrote:
It doesn't take as many manhours to map a desert as it takes to map
downtown Melbourne.
Cartinus
Please don't come up with this sort of nonsense
Ha, ha, ha.
You do say the funniest things sometimes, Liz.
But only
On 9 August 2010 23:40, Julio Costa Zambelli
julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote:
The government imports (some highways, schools, hospitals, boundaries,
etc.) are an essential part of what we are doing here, and at least
for us, the license change represents no problem.
What about the new
But strangely enough it is a lot more complicated to map remote areas
such a desert than to map a city. Logistics for a start, I can catch
a bus and map my city locally for an hour or two, the city bus just
doesn't run to remote areas and there are a lot of remote areas in
Canada. I have written
John,
That may be a problem, but my impression is that the point four solves it.
Cheers
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 9:56 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 August 2010 23:40, Julio Costa Zambelli
julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote:
The government imports (some highways, schools,
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Julio Costa Zambelli
julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote:
Aun,
+1 from Chile.
The government imports (some highways, schools, hospitals, boundaries,
etc.) are an essential part of what we are doing here, and at least
for us, the license change represents no
John Smith schrieb:
The problem here isn't imports, if anything the few imports we have
had helped make the map less blank where fewer people map, which isn't
the same thing as fewer people living.
We have a number of reports here that people took a look, saw that
there's nothing interesting
George,
If The contributor terms contain clauses that permit OSMF to do
whatever they like with the content including change the license off
course any non PD import will not be compatible at all.
We will have to ask the agencies to agree with the Contributor Terms
but if we are changing to a PD
On 10 August 2010 04:10, Julio Costa Zambelli
julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote:
If this is voted as a package I will obviously have to vote against
the change (I do not want to see 7/8 of the Chilean highways
disappearing from the map in one day, not to say many POIs that we
were about to
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Julio Costa Zambelli
julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote:
We will have to ask the agencies to agree with the Contributor Terms
but if we are changing to a PD license disguised as BY-SA (via the CT)
they probably will not cooperate.
OSMF is not moving to a PD
John,
John Smith wrote:
And this is why Frederik wants to get rid of data imports, because it
reduces the chances of getting a PD dataset by stealth or feature
creep
Maybe if you'd scale back your demagogy a bit. The subject you chose for
this thread is offensive enough.
Nothing here
On 10 August 2010 05:46, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Maybe if you'd scale back your demagogy a bit. The subject you chose for
this thread is offensive enough.
Sorry if the truth hurts, but some of us are offended by the notion
that something we find useful can be so easily and
I honestly think the way forward is to continue as we are currently
and set up a separate project which is pure PD. Extract anything that
can be extracted from the current map, this can be done by selecting
data which has been contributed by those who are happy with public
domain licensing and
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
OSMF is not moving to a PD license disguised as BY-SA
Then why don't they ever talk about the fact that the contents are
going to be released under DbCL?
___
talk mailing list
Hi,
Anthony wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
OSMF is not moving to a PD license disguised as BY-SA
Then why don't they ever talk about the fact that the contents are
going to be released under DbCL?
Because it is irrelevant given that the
On 10 August 2010 07:11, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Because it is irrelevant given that the Database as a whole is protected,
rather than the individual pieces it contains which, as you correctly state,
are largely unprotectable anway?
Largely isn't completely, which means you
Hi,
John Smith wrote:
Because it is irrelevant given that the Database as a whole is protected,
rather than the individual pieces it contains which, as you correctly state,
are largely unprotectable anway?
Largely isn't completely, which means you are suggesting that if there
is any
On 10 August 2010 07:25, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
they do. and it's in the contributor terms: ODbL 1.0 for the database
and DbCL 1.0 for the individual contents of the database. the
database is attribution and share-alike. the contents, as facts, hold
no copyright - so copyright
On 10 August 2010 07:30, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I think it has been repeated countless times already, and it is funny to see
how both you and Anthony seem to ignore that.
We're not ignoring anything, the problem is the content license
explicitly removes copyright, which makes
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
OSMF is not moving to a PD license disguised as BY-SA, OSMF would
like to move to ODbL. however, it has to be pointed out that CC BY-SA
might be described as a PD license disguised as BY-SA, since many
lawyers (including
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:30 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 August 2010 07:25, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
they do. and it's in the contributor terms: ODbL 1.0 for the database
and DbCL 1.0 for the individual contents of the database. the
database is
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010, Frederik Ramm wrote:
John and Liz in Australia say that CC-BY(-SA) works for geodata in
Australia, meaning that facts can be copyrighted. Several Australian
judges seem to think otherwise but let's assume it were so.
Misquote
John has pointed out twice that one legal
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 5:11 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
Anthony wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
OSMF is not moving to a PD license disguised as BY-SA
Then why don't they ever talk about the fact that the contents are
going
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:30 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 August 2010 07:25, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
they do. and it's in the contributor terms: ODbL 1.0 for the database
and DbCL 1.0
On 10 August 2010 07:43, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
wouldn't you prefer to protect the *whole* database?
That isn't the point, the point was about it *explicitly* removing any
claim of copyright, which then makes it incompatible with BY and SA
data sources.
On 10 August 2010 07:25, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
they do. and it's in the contributor terms: ODbL 1.0 for the database
and DbCL 1.0 for the individual contents of the database. the
One other thing. What is meant by the individual contents of the
database. Is a changeset an
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:41 PM, Julio Costa Zambelli
julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
OSMF is not moving to a PD license disguised as BY-SA, OSMF would
like to move to ODbL. however, it has to be pointed out that CC BY-SA
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:56 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 August 2010 07:43, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
wouldn't you prefer to protect the *whole* database?
That isn't the point, the point was about it *explicitly* removing any
claim of copyright, which
On 10 August 2010 08:02, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
that's currently awaiting legal advice. but if you can save us, and
the lawyers, the trouble of giving advice, thanks!
How many different lawyers have been asked, and do they all share the
same opinions that we've been hearing?
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 5:43 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:30 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 10 August 2010 07:25, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
they do. and it's
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Can we get a collection of quotes from those lawyers that you say
think otherwise? Exact quotes of what they said?
unfortunately not. apparently legal advice
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Fortunately most people seem to grasp the concept but I've here made an
effort to present it, again, in simple terms to increase the number of those
who do.
Most people are actually pretty clueless about the details
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:43 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:30 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 10 August 2010 07:25, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
they do. and it's in the contributor terms: ODbL 1.0 for the database
and DbCL
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 5:43 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Most of the cases you are probably familiar with involve simple lists of
telephone numbers and subscribers. The moment you add even the slightest
originality to a collection of facts then it become eligible for copyright.
Can you
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Can we get a collection of quotes from those lawyers that you say
think otherwise? Exact quotes
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:05 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 10 August 2010 08:02, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
that's currently awaiting legal advice. but if you can save us, and
the lawyers, the trouble of giving advice, thanks!
How many different lawyers have
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:43 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Matt, you really do need to read up on case law about the minimum threshold
for copyrightability.
i have. but perhaps you could point out the judgements you're
referring to, because i've not seen them.
cheers,
matt
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:59 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
unfortunately, we will lose data this time around - it's unavoidable
Data loss can easily be avoided. Just abandon your attempts to change the
license.
If you want an ODbL licensed project why not just start one?
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:43 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Matt, you really do need to read up on case law about the minimum
threshold
for copyrightability.
i have. but perhaps you could point out the judgements
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:48 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 11:22 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Matt Amos zerebub...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:52 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
Can we get a collection of
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 5:43 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Most of the cases you are probably familiar with involve simple lists of
telephone numbers and subscribers. The moment you add even the slightest
originality to a
On Tue, 10 Aug 2010, Ian Dees wrote:
Most of the cases you are probably familiar with involve simple lists of
telephone numbers and subscribers. The moment you add even the slightest
originality to a collection of facts then it become eligible for
copyright.
Can you give examples of
On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Ian Dees ian.d...@gmail.com wrote:
Can you give examples of what you consider originality in the OSM database?
Is a painting of a flower copyrightable? What about a tracing of a
photograph of a flower? What if you just trace the outline of the
flower?
Is a
Probably if you live in an area with a fairly large number of mappers
on the ground imports have less impact, reality is trying to map
Canada from GPS traces is a bit unrealistic. I tend not to go for
walks at minus thirty, or even minus twenty come to that.
Cheerio John
On 8 August 2010 05:38,
2010/8/8 John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-August/003908.html
Basically those in favour of PD but not directly effected by or
benefiting from data imports would like to have them all ripped out
and replaced with surveyed data.
I
Peteris Krisjanis wrote:
I respect PD guys, but in overall, I start to grow to openly
dislike their attitude.
Could you cite who these alleged PD guys are, please? Thanks in advance.
I'm getting increasingly exasperated with people projecting this big
bogeyman (or strawman. A big man made
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
Peteris Krisjanis wrote:
I respect PD guys, but in overall, I start to grow to openly
dislike their attitude.
Could you cite who these alleged PD guys are, please? Thanks in advance.
I'm getting increasingly
80n wrote:
Isn't it going to present some complicated management problems if the
LWG changes the contributor terms at this stage in the process?
No, not in this case. The proposal is a subset of the powers currently
available to OSMF, not a superset. It is the existing CT _minus_ the
option
2010/8/8 Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net:
Peteris Krisjanis wrote:
I respect PD guys, but in overall, I start to grow to openly
dislike their attitude.
Could you cite who these alleged PD guys are, please? Thanks in advance.
Sorry, it wasn't meant PD supportive persons in OSM in
On 8 August 2010 13:25, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Isn't it going to present some complicated management problems if the LWG
changes the contributor terms at this stage in the process? There are
already some 30,000 accounts that have signed up to CT 1.0, if the next
batch agrees to a
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 12:41 PM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
80n wrote:
Isn't it going to present some complicated management problems if the
LWG changes the contributor terms at this stage in the process?
No, not in this case. The proposal is a subset of the powers
On 8 August 2010 13:25, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net
wrote:
What mandate does LWG have to change the contributor terms anyway? Would
they need to put it to a vote of OSMF members or would they need to follow
the
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 6:51 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
PD has nothing to do with it. Full stop.
What's the difference between PD and DBCL?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
John Smith schrieb:
For anyone still fence sitting over the new contributor terms and the
ODBL this is what you have to look forward to in the near future:
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-August/003908.html
Don't fight his conclusion, but his if in that sentence: |If
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
John Smith schrieb:
For anyone still fence sitting over the new contributor terms and the
ODBL this is what you have to look forward to in the near future:
On 8 August 2010 23:23, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
Let's go what if and weigh the grand outcomes logically, not not fight
over some people pointing out some details of some possible outcome.
So those people that have been importing cc-by-sa go what if and
conclude that most of their
On 8 August 2010 23:31, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
Who's talking about changing the direction of OSM? There's no consensus for
any change of direction that I'm aware of. Arguing that imports should not
be allowed because there *might* be change in direction is very
presumptuous.
He wasn't
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
John Smith schrieb:
For anyone still fence sitting over the new contributor terms and the
ODBL this is what you have to look forward to in the near future:
John,
On 08/08/2010 11:38 AM, John Smith wrote:
Basically those in favour of PD but not directly effected by or
benefiting from data imports would like to have them all ripped out
and replaced with surveyed data.
It's nothing to do with PD. It's that I'm sick and tired of hearing we
cannot
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I don't see any reason for an outcry other than this might make the
coastline less precise for a while. Chances are it is going to be fixed very
quickly in areas with Yahoo imagery, and might retain some of the typical
On 9 August 2010 00:07, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
It's nothing to do with PD. It's that I'm sick and tired of hearing we
cannot go ahead with ODbL because someone in Australia imported some
coastline.
And I've tried to explain numerous times that it goes well beyond
coastlines,
On 9 August 2010 00:39, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
If the license change is important, why don't the people who want the
license change make their own coastline, on the dev server. This can
be done quickly, right? *Then* you can delete the import, and replace
it with the one on the dev
On 9 August 2010 00:59, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote:
On 9 August 2010 00:58, Erik Johansson e...@kth.se wrote:
Australia 2 people per km^2
Sweden 21 people per km^2
Canada is ~3 people per km^2...
Oh and most people in Canada live within 100km of the US border, and
in
Hi,
On 08/08/2010 04:39 PM, Anthony wrote:
If the license change is important, why don't the people who want the
license change make their own coastline, on the dev server. This can
be done quickly, right? *Then* you can delete the import, and replace
it with the one on the dev server.
I
On 9 August 2010 01:00, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
In fact, this is exactly what I said I would do - not delete the existing
coastline, but replace it with a version that has a suitable license. For
some reason John Smith does not seem to share our view that this is a
reasonable
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
On 08/08/2010 04:39 PM, Anthony wrote:
If the license change is important, why don't the people who want the
license change make their own coastline, on the dev server. This can
be done quickly, right? *Then*
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 3:07 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
John,
On 08/08/2010 11:38 AM, John Smith wrote:
Basically those in favour of PD but not directly effected by or
benefiting from data imports would like to have them all ripped out
and replaced with surveyed data.
Hi,
On 08/08/2010 05:13 PM, Anthony wrote:
No, what I said is that you need to start from a blank map. If you
want to create a map which isn't CC-BY-SA, you aren't allowed to use
the CC-BY-SA map to do it.
Depends on how exactly you use it. If you use the CC-BY-SA map to flag
stuff that
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
On 08/08/2010 05:13 PM, Anthony wrote:
No, what I said is that you need to start from a blank map. If you
want to create a map which isn't CC-BY-SA, you aren't allowed to use
the CC-BY-SA map to do it.
Depends
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 11:15 AM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote:
There's likely to be 20% data loss based on the feedback I'm getting.
I can't imagine it'll be anywhere near that low. What percentage of
contributors are even still active? Maybe 20% of active contributors
will disagree with the
Am 08.08.2010 16:59, schrieb John Smith:
On 9 August 2010 00:58, Erik Johansson e...@kth.se wrote:
Australia 2 people per km^2
Sweden 21 people per km^2
Canada is ~3 people per km^2...
You seem to forget that the most interesting Data (to most people) is
also where the people are.
Forests,
2010/8/9 Dirk-Lüder Kreie osm-l...@deelkar.net:
With enough (motivated) people we can take any data loss, and rebuild
our database to be better within a short timeframe.
It may sound arrogant, but if you look at it rationally, we could even
compensate for mappers demotivated by any data loss
80n schrieb:
On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Robert Kaiserka...@kairo.at wrote:
And if we want to change the
direction os OSM, [...]
Who's talking about changing the direction of OSM?
Hehe, another case of jumping on the conclusion, rather than the if. ;-)
I should probably noted that I
John Smith schrieb:
On 8 August 2010 23:23, Robert Kaiserka...@kairo.at wrote:
Offending them doesn't help either. We are still ONE community in ONE
He seems to be doing a good job of offending Australians and anyone
else that has been involved with either importing or cleaning up
imports in
On Sunday 08 August 2010 17:40:40 John Smith wrote:
You've made a couple of big incorrect assumptions, firstly we have a
big lack of contributors at present in Australia
Which probably has the same cause as the lack of contributors in the
Netherlands: Too many imports!
--
m.v.g.,
Cartinus
Anthony schrieb:
And I'm sure if you do it that way you'll be infringing on the
copyright of the CC-BY-SA data.
Gah, what are we? I thought we were an OPEN project that likes
share-alike licensing, mostly without that the explicit terms of those
licenses really matter. Only lawyers can
1 - 100 of 125 matches
Mail list logo