On 24 August 2010 11:18, James Livingston <li...@sunsetutopia.com> wrote:
> On 23/08/2010, at 4:22 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > Not only the Contributor Terms - the whole project is. Data importing > should always be the exception and not the rule. > > But is it though? I guess that's the nub of the issue with data imports and > licensing - some people are against data imports and some people like them. > > > Ignoring my personal view on whether imports are good or not, I think that > we shouldn't have exceptions to the rule. I think we should either have a > rule preventing imports (the *only* exception being for true PD, no > copyright holder, data) or we shouldn't have that rule and imports are okay. > > If the rule is "no imports", then we should get rid of the Australian > Government data, the AND data, the MassGIS data, the French castradal data, > and so on. If the rule isn't "no imports", then we need to deal with the > fact they are going to happen and determine how to best fit it all in with > licensing. > The French cadastral information is mostly tracing from a WMS, so I would find it difficult to consider it an import. If you do then you would need to remove also Yahoo and the rest :) Emilie Laffray
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
