I strongly urge that they get a lawyer to do write / bless something
like CC0 rather than going to the internet to get a suggestion. This
is scientific data, and the CC0 was done for that. However, I can't
say this enough: they need a lawyer that's an expert on whatever kind
of quazi-governmental a
I'm not speaking for Google (and have no specific knowledge) ...
I think the forcing factor was cloud computing not ad networks.
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 1:00 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp
wrote:
>
> In message <58407de7.1030...@edlmax.com>, Brooks Harris writes:
>
> > As I read it I think Goog
According to this email,
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2016-February/023209.html
the IERS will be adding a copyright notice allowing free use of the
leap second list.
Guess we just have to wait for the next one.
Cheers
Michael
On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
In message
, Warner
Losh writes:
>It's also all boilerplate. There's no creative content, so it's quite
>likely it wouldn't even qualify for copyright protection. You can't
>copyright facts, and that's all that differs from report to report.
That is actually an interesting detail.
The
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> In message ,
> =?utf-8?Q?Ask_Bj=C3=B8rn_Hansen?= writes:
>
>>> It does not have any copyright claims on it I can identify. Not
>>> do the other related files, like
>>> https://hpiers.obspm.fr/eoppc/bul/bulc/Leap_Second_History.
In message ,
=?utf-8?Q?Ask_Bj=C3=B8rn_Hansen?= writes:
>> It does not have any copyright claims on it I can identify. Not
>> do the other related files, like
>> https://hpiers.obspm.fr/eoppc/bul/bulc/Leap_Second_History.dat.
>>
>> Seems to me any copyright claim would defeat the IERS pu
> On Dec 2, 2016, at 08:14, Brooks Harris wrote:
>
> It does not have any copyright claims on it I can identify. Not do the other
> related files, like
> https://hpiers.obspm.fr/eoppc/bul/bulc/Leap_Second_History.dat.
>
> Seems to me any copyright claim would defeat the IERS purposes. Seems t
Brooks Harris wrote:
> On 2016-12-02 12:57 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
> > They aren't regular... There's no formula to look up, no regular rule.
> > There's no math that will save you... they are irregular and there's
> > no standard way to get the leap second info reliably
>
> Oh yes. This seems like
Thanks Tony,
On 2016-12-02 10:03 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
Brooks Harris wrote:
Can you explain that copyright issue further? I was under the impression
Bulletin C and related from IERS were public.
There was a discussion of this issue on the tz list in February:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz
Brooks Harris wrote:
> Can you explain that copyright issue further? I was under the impression
> Bulletin C and related from IERS were public.
There was a discussion of this issue on the tz list in February:
http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/tz/2016-February/023171.html
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch
Hi Tony,
On 2016-12-02 08:43 AM, Tony Finch wrote:
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
I don't know what the effective latency is from IERS -> TZdata -> distros ->
releases -> users -> computers, but 6 months is only going to be enough
if everybody pays maximum attention *EVERY* *BLOODY* *TIME*.
The cas
On 2016-12-02 12:57 AM, Warner Losh wrote:
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 6:49 PM, Brooks Harris wrote:
Hi Warner,
On 2016-12-01 08:02 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:28 PM, Stephen Colebourne
wrote:
On 1 December 2016 at 19:45, Brooks Harris wrote:
As I read it I think Google's i
Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>
> I don't know what the effective latency is from IERS -> TZdata -> distros ->
> releases -> users -> computers, but 6 months is only going to be enough
> if everybody pays maximum attention *EVERY* *BLOODY* *TIME*.
The cascade actually goes IERS -> NIST -> tz because t
In message <20161202095852.d2017406...@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>, Hal
Murray writes:
>
>> That's another problem with leap seconds: they are irregular and there's no
>> standard way to get the leap second info reliably (though there are sources
>> of data on the internet that are c
> That's another problem with leap seconds: they are irregular and there's no
> standard way to get the leap second info reliably (though there are sources
> of data on the internet that are changing that if you are connected.
There is a plan to distribute a leap second file as part of the time
In message <58407de7.1030...@edlmax.com>, Brooks Harris writes:
> As I read it I think Google's intention is to publish their method and
> algorithm in the hopes others may follow it. It would be better if
> everybody did it the same way, but it will remain to be seen if others
> will
16 matches
Mail list logo
