Re: [OSM-talk] Draft Geocoding Guideline

Hi all - A few thoughts on the comments. Speaking entirely on my own behalf here, I have not gotten feedback on this yet from the rest of the LWG. [from Christoph] But if you aggregate such results they can become subject to the ODbL. . . > The difference is that indirect results are

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Vector Tiles: ODbL and non-free data

.de> wrote: > Am Di, 6.09.2016, 20:14 schrieb Michael Steffen: > > > > We have hundreds of customers hosting their own private data on our > secure > > infrastructure. Many customers are also hosting private data that they > > license from 3rd parties. Give me a hol

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Vector Tiles: ODbL and non-free data

gt; Am Di, 6.09.2016, 17:33 schrieb Michael Steffen: > > > > This should be totally fine. Feel free to reach out directly if you > > want to talk in more detail. > > Yeah, I might contact you in the next days. A problem could be that I > have to upload the non-free data to M

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Vector Tiles: ODbL and non-free data

Hi Tobias - Michael at Mapbox here. Just overlay, no other interaction. This should be totally fine. Feel free to reach out directly if you want to talk in more detail. -Michael On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 8:08 AM, Rory McCann wrote: > On 06/09/16 15:13, Tobias Wendorff

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Proposed "Metadata"-Guideline

Simon et al - First of all, hello! I started a few months ago as in-house counsel at Mapbox. I come from the U.S. gov (FCC) where I did a lot of work, among other things, on opening FCC geodata to the public. I've had to focus on other things in my first few months, but am looking forward to