On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 08:23:19AM -0700, SteveC wrote:
> On 23 Oct 2008, at 07:17, 80n wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 8:06 AM, Jochen Topf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 09:24:37PM -0700, SteveC wrote:
> > > I've received back general comments from Wilson Sonsi
On 25 Oct 2008, at 07:57, Jochen Topf wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 08:23:19AM -0700, SteveC wrote:
>> On 23 Oct 2008, at 07:17, 80n wrote:
>>
>>> [..]
>> Please don't mail him personally, the worst thing would be multiple
>> conversations as his time is valuable and they are doing this pro-
>
Hi,
Shaun McDonald wrote:
> Because there isn't enough time to read and answer all the mails that
> come to this list. It is better to bundle everything up, filtering all
> the duplicates and getting him to answer them all at once.
Granted. Whoever does the "bundling and filtering", please pu
Rob Myers wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:49 AM, Joseph Gentle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
>> And the map wins. It gets more visibillity.
>
> The promise that someone will hold you in higher esteem if you abandon
> your principles rarely works out.
I don't think this issue is anything to
I wasn't quite sure what exactly was wrong with Rob's comments but you
summed it up nicely.
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 5:18 PM, Jonathan Harley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > The promise that someone will hold you in higher esteem if you abandon
> > your principles rarely works out.
>
> I don't th
Hi,
Simon Ward wrote:
>> Not: You don't give us your data, fine, then we create a complex legal
>> licensing framework that will ultimately get you bogged down …
>
> That’s enough, really. As unserious as Richard can be this is just
> trolling. If you have a problem with the share-alike, you’re
> > The promise that someone will hold you in higher esteem if you abandon
> > your principles rarely works out.
>
> I don't think this issue is anything to do with esteem, but what
> principle here are you asserting we would be abandoning? The principle
> that if commercial companies use OSM data
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 6:49 PM, Peter Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> My company (Ito World Ltd) needs to be able to combine Share-Alike data
> from
> OSM with copyright data from other sources ...
IMHO "Other sources" are usually incompatible with SA.
>
> software and produce rendered i
On 25 Oct 2008, at 11:56, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> What I don't like about share-alike is the small-minded attempt to
> codify this
> giving away into something legally binding. To me, this is deeply
> based
> in a negativist, paranoid world view where everyone is out to cheat
> you.
... whic
Hi,
Jonathan Harley wrote:
> The principle
> that if commercial companies use OSM data, they must be forced to give
> away their proprietary data as well? If so, that's not a principle I
> share.
+1
> I disagree, community projects (like everyone else) *should* practice
> random acts of kindness
Joseph Gentle schrieb:
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 12:06 PM, 80n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I like so view OSM as a cool DIY project, not a political trick we're
>>> pulling.
>> The problem with PD is that it permits companies to take OSM data, add their
>> own data and benefit from result withou
On Sat, 25 Oct 2008, Peter Miller wrote:
> Does that make sense?
>
>
Yes.
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 8:57 AM, Philipp Klaus Krause <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> To me the main problem with copyleft licenses is that there are so many
> incompatible ones of them.
Here's the compatibility chart amongst creative-commons licenses:
http://mirrors.creativecommons.org/blimg/cc-tw-l
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 7:08 AM, SteveC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 25 Oct 2008, at 11:56, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> What I don't like about share-alike is the small-minded attempt to
>> codify this
>> giving away into something legally binding. To me, this is deeply
>> based
>> in a negativist,
Hi,
Joseph Gentle wrote:
> Here's a great write-up with a guy bitching about; and concluding its
> better to just go PD.
> http://opencontent.org/blog/archives/347
There's also this SystemeD blog guy here with a spot-on 2.5 year old
write-up:
http://www.systemed.net/blog/legacy/entry06031112265
On 25 Oct 2008, at 18:57, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 7:08 AM, SteveC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 25 Oct 2008, at 11:56, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>>> What I don't like about share-alike is the small-minded attempt to
>>> codify this
>>> giving away into something legally bindi
Steve: I'm confused. Please reconcile these two statements:
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 5:50 PM, SteveC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Guys OSM isn't going PD... can't you go start
> ReallyFreeAndOpenStreetMap.org or something?
>
> Best
>
> Steve
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Simon Ward <[EMAIL PRO
I'm not convinced that this will ever happen but:
What sort of support from the community would be needed to public domain OSM?
I want to know:
- How many people would rather OSM was PD at this time? How do we find
this out? Would a web-based poll be appropriate?
- How many would we need to ma
If I ever start a open project again I will put a mission statement
central to it. I think I was the one who originally wrote "The project
was started because most maps you think of as free actually have legal
or technical restrictions on their use, holding back people from using
them in cr
On 25 Oct 2008, at 19:43, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> I'm not convinced that this will ever happen but:
>
> What sort of support from the community would be needed to public
> domain OSM?
>
>
> I want to know:
>
> - How many people would rather OSM was PD at this time? How do we find
> this out? Wou
On Sun, 26 Oct 2008, Joseph Gentle wrote:
> I want to know:
>
> - How many people would rather OSM was PD at this time? How do we find
> this out? Would a web-based poll be appropriate?
Many might like to know, but the facts are that there are people who back both
sides.
The psychologists would t
There is talk underway to do so.
However, many of us feel that splitting the user base and splitting
contributions would be destructive. We could produce better maps if we
cooperated.
Don't you agree?
-J
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 11:47 AM, SteveC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If I ever start a op
Hi,
Joseph Gentle wrote:
> What sort of support from the community would be needed to public domain OSM?
My answer applies to any license change, be that ODbL or PD or whatever.
The problem with that is that *any* change of license will require a
concerted effort by many people in the project.
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Frederik Ramm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Frederik
I agree with all of this. I don't want to confuse the issues; but I do
want more data about the opinions of average mappers than an argument
on the internet can provide.
I am unfortunately frustrated
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Joseph Gentle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Frederik Ramm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> Frederik
>
>
> I agree with all of this. I don't want to confuse the issues; but I do
> want more data about the opinions of avera
25 matches
Mail list logo
