I'm sure Alex is reading the list, but I am too :) If there are concerns with our license, we'll work to address them - a key goal of ours is to support OSM and that was a firm requirement when the license was drafted.
Cheers Ben 2009/12/9 James Livingston <[email protected]> > On 09/12/2009, at 6:38 PM, Roy Wallace wrote: > > "If you derive information from observing our PhotoMaps, and include > > that information in a work, you will own that work, and may distribute > > it to others under a Creative Commons licence." > > > > Does that not imply that the derived information may only be > > distributed to others "under a Creative Commons licence"? Maybe I'm > > reading this incorrectly? > > As mentioned by others, the obvious thing to do is ask the NearMap guys > (I've explicitly CC'd Alex, in case he isn't reading the list) what they > meant - that's more important than what they actually wrote, since we'd > obviously want to be nice to them. > > But just going off what is written there, if the person tracing owns it (in > the copyright holder sense), then they can license it however they want. In > that case, a CC license is just an option (and it says "may" not "may only" > or "must"). > > > With respect to ODbL, I think import CC-BY data into an ODbL database is > fine - we'd fulfil the attribution requirement (CC-BY-SA wouldn't be, on the > other hand). The problem if OSM goes ahead with the re-license would be the > contributor terms, that means you can't import CC-BY data without the > copyright holders approval. > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > -- Ben Last Development Manager (HyperWeb) NearMap Pty Ltd
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
