Jukka Rahkonen schrieb:
> And if the maintainer of the derived database has a
> community that continues to collect new data under ODbL 1.0 terms, and the
> main
> OSM has advanced to ODbL 1.1 or something, is it possible to exchange data
> between these two systems?
According to RC1, you could
Hi,
Gervase Markham wrote:
> The way of avoiding it seeming to be FUD is to have a clause like:
>
> "Nothing in this licence attempts to restrict your rights under fair use
> or a similar doctrine".
Sounds like: "We have a honest desire to sue the shit out of you if you
violate any of our 52
Ulf Möller writes:
>
> Jukka Rahkonen schrieb:
>
> > But what if OSMF is changing the license and somebody has
> > managed to base some business on top of derived database
licensed under the old
> > ODbL license? Dou you lawyers say that it is a sound basis
for building a
> > business? For
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:36 AM, Peter Miller wrote:
> There is both the situation were OSM bulk-imports some data
> from another source into OSM that is published as ODbL where the
> original data owner can not be contacted which I would hope would be
> possible,
under the ODbL as proposed, i do
On 12/05/09 09:37, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Claiming copyright on something where you are not reasonably sure of
> actually having it is, in my eyes, a FUD maneouvre worthy of players
> like the OS, but something that we should make an attempt to steer clear of.
The way of avoiding it seeming to be
