On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 2:15 PM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 16 September 2010 04:12, Richard Weait <rich...@weait.com> wrote: >> bad. This isn't a competition with a winner and loser. The fact is >> that NearMap don't want OSM users using their imagery right now. So >> we shouldn't. > > This isn't true, they don't want to allow their data to be submitted > under the new Contributor Terms, they are happy for it to be submitted > under cc-by-sa, which anyone that has not agreed to the new CTs is > able to do.
I'm trying to understand your recommendation to keep mapping from a problematic source. I'll try to put this in your terms. Do you agree that: 1) There is a chance that OSM will adopt the ODbL and CT 2) There is a chance that NearMap derived objects would have to be removed when ODbL and CT are accepted And yet you would recommend continuing mapping from this and other problematic sources, rather than mapping from ground survey and first principles? I don't think that your recommendation is in the best interest of OpenStreetMap or OSM contributors. _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
