I have been wondering how much data has been imported into OSM from OS
Opendata and who has accepted the CTs. I still think that the CTs ask
for rights to be granted that are broader than are granted by the
Opendata license. This point is disputed by Richard and others. Here are
the most
Hi,
On 04/19/11 12:32, TimSC wrote:
I still think that the CTs ask
for rights to be granted that are broader than are granted by the
Opendata license. This point is disputed by Richard and others. Here are
the most prolific Opendata users (in terms of version 1 objects) that
have accepted the
On 19/04/11 11:45, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
On 04/19/11 12:32, TimSC wrote:
I still think that the CTs ask
for rights to be granted that are broader than are granted by the
Opendata license. This point is disputed by Richard and others. Here are
the most prolific Opendata users (in terms of
On 18 April 2011 23:21, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Richard Bullock wrote:
It's on the Copyright page though
http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright
United Kingdom: Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and
database right 2010.
That is, IIRC, what we were required to
On 19 April 2011 14:14, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote:
- Original Message - From: TimSC mapp...@sheerman-chase.org.uk
To: talk-gb@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2011 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] OSM Contributor Terms vs OS OpenData Licence
On 19/04/11
Being cast as the most guilty party threatening OSM by having the greatest
number of OS data edits and signing the CTs - I thought I'd contribute to
make it clear where I stand. I'm absolutely with Peter Miller on this. I
trust the OSMF implicitly to get it right which is why I signed the CTs.
I have also made some contributions based on OS OpenData and have just
accepted the new CTs.
I am disappointed that it got to the point that we had to accept or decline
the new terms before the issue over the OS data has been settled, but
reasoned that the vast majority of my contributions have
On 19 April 2011 20:06, Graham Jones grahamjones...@gmail.com wrote:
Declining the new terms would have been silly because it would have meant my
non-OS based contributions being removed,
That would only be the case if/when we proceed to the next stage in
the licence change process and you
I've just declined the new OSM Contributor Terms (CTs), because I've
previously made edits based on OS OpenData, and my understanding is
that the Ordnance Survey (OS) OpenData Licence is incompatible with
the current version of the OSM Contributor Terms (1.2.4).
I appreciate that licence
Robert Whittaker (OSM robert.whittaker+osm@... writes:
I've just declined the new OSM Contributor Terms (CTs)
I wish to put it on record that I have signed up to the ODBL and CTs. I also
wish to put it on record that I have contributed mapping based on OS Opendata
both before and after
Robert,
On 18 April 2011 14:12, Robert Whittaker wrote:
I appreciate that licence discussion really belongs on legal-talk, but
I thought I should post this here about this UK-specific issue -- in
order to prevent people signing up to the new CTs without realizing
the potential
Robert Whittaker wrote:
I've just declined the new OSM Contributor Terms (CTs), because
I've previously made edits based on OS OpenData
In which case, I would appreciate it that if you carry out any future
non-OS-derived edits, you do so from another account with assent to the
Contributor
On 18/04/2011 16:59, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
Robert Whittaker wrote:
I've just declined the new OSM Contributor Terms (CTs), because
I've previously made edits based on OS OpenData
In which case, I would appreciate it that if you carry out any future
non-OS-derived edits, you do so from
On 18/04/2011 15:33, Tom Chance wrote:
Robert,
On 18 April 2011 14:12, Robert Whittaker wrote:
I appreciate that licence discussion really belongs on legal-talk, but
I thought I should post this here about this UK-specific issue -- in
order to prevent people signing up to the new
Dave F. wrote:
On 18/04/2011 16:59, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
In which case, I would appreciate it that if you carry out any future
non-OS-derived edits, you do so from another account with assent to the
Contributor Terms.
Did you mean *non*-OS edits? If so could you expand on that please?
On 18 April 2011 16:59, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net wrote:
Robert Whittaker wrote:
I've just declined the new OSM Contributor Terms (CTs), because
I've previously made edits based on OS OpenData
In which case, I would appreciate it that if you carry out any future
non-OS-derived
on this issue.
Thanks,
Nick
-Robert Whittaker (OSM) robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com wrote: -
To: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
From: Robert Whittaker (OSM) robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com
Date: 18/04/2011 02:14PM
Subject: [Talk-GB] OSM Contributor Terms vs OS OpenData Licence
I've just declined the new
Nick Whitelegg wrote:
So I take it that now I've signed I can't contribute any more OS stuff?
I believe you can and am continuing to use OpenData as often as I did before
(that's not very often). Robert believes you can't and has explained why
in this thread.
there do seem to be slightly
Robert Whittaker (OSM) [mailto:robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com]wrote
Sent: 18 April 2011 2:13 PM
To: Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
Subject: [Talk-GB] OSM Contributor Terms vs OS OpenData Licence
I've just declined the new OSM Contributor Terms (CTs), because I've
previously made edits based on OS
On 18/04/11 21:59, Andy Robinson (blackadder-lists) wrote:
If you make sure your OS derived contributions carry the source information
then that attribution will be in the OSM db for all to see for ever and a
day, regardless of what OSMF does with it in the future under some other
free and open
Hi,
TimSC wrote:
Except if someone creates a derivative database based on the main OSM
database, and strips out the source tags. Or creates a produced works,
which doesn't carry attribution to OSM but not OS. You also violate the
CTs.
I'm an outsider to all this OS business but if you guys
On 18/04/11 22:23, Frederik Ramm wrote:
I'm an outsider to all this OS business but if you guys in the UK
should really have been uploading data that requires attributing OS in
every downstream product then we have a problem which has nothing
whatsover to do with the license change. I can
Hi,
TimSC wrote:
We do have an
imperfect attribution on the wiki [1] for CC attribution. Agreeing to
the CTs seems to be a bigger violation than our current practice,
because it declares that the contributor has unlimited rights over the
data (in order to grant OSMF that right too).
I
On Apr 18, 2011, at 2:42 PM, TimSC wrote:
On 18/04/11 22:23, Frederik Ramm wrote:
I'm an outsider to all this OS business but if you guys in the UK should
really have been uploading data that requires attributing OS in every
downstream product then we have a problem which has nothing
Perhaps the best course of action would be for an additional checkbox on the
contributor terms page to say 'I have used OS OpenData'. Then people would be
able to sign up to support the licence change, if they wish, and it would be up
to the legal people at OSMF to decide whether the data from
I'm an outsider to all this OS business but if you guys in the UK should
really have been uploading data that requires attributing OS in every
downstream product then we have a problem which has nothing whatsover to
do with the license change. I can see *no* OS attribution on any of the
major
On 18 April 2011 22:50, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
TimSC wrote:
We do have an imperfect attribution on the wiki [1] for CC attribution.
Agreeing to the CTs seems to be a bigger violation than our current
practice, because it declares that the contributor has unlimited rights over
Hi,
Richard Bullock wrote:
It's on the Copyright page though
http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright
United Kingdom: Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and
database right 2010.
That is, IIRC, what we were required to state.
Well in that case, as long as nobody is planning to
28 matches
Mail list logo
