Hi, here is the post of the thread I pointed out earlier explaining why this is not clear at all, and why we have tried to reach the people behind opencellid.org (without any success).
http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/devel/2009-January/004161.html <quote> The logo is placed next to the copyright for the website, so it could also stand for the license of the website... <end of quote> This dates back to January. Now to my understanding, the sentence (which is new to me): "The data are available under the "Creative Common" license." which points to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ lets me think it is now ok. Onen Quoting Olivier Migeot <larry...@gmail.com>: > On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Timo Juhani Lindfors > <timo.lindf...@iki.fi> wrote: > > > There are many creative commons licenses, some are permit commercial > > use, some don't. > > If you go one click further, you'd discover that the said "Creative > Commons" licence chosed by OpenCellID is : > http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ > > So it should be ok for openbmap guys. That could explain the thing > about "merging" both databases. Any "official" insight on this? I've > been collecting cell information for a few weeks, with some home-made > script, and I'd like to know where I should commit them to. > > Thanks. > > -- > Olivier > > _______________________________________________ > Openmoko community mailing list > community@lists.openmoko.org > http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community > _______________________________________________ Openmoko community mailing list community@lists.openmoko.org http://lists.openmoko.org/mailman/listinfo/community