Peter Millar schreef:
>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "Henk Hoff"
>> To: "Licensing and other legal discussions."
>> Sent: Saturday, 6 June, 2009 01:54:07 GMT +00:00 GMT Britain, Ireland,
>> Portugal
>> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL RC and share-alike licensing of Produced
>>
Hi,
Henk Hoff wrote:
> It is proposed to removed the clause 4.7 altogether
I think that is a good idea.
Just to clarify:
* I use OSM data to create a printed A-Z map of London (which is clearly
not a data base, is it?)
* I publish that produced work under a BSD license
* A competing project
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Before, the reverse engineering clause would have kicked in and forced
> FSM to be under ODBL. In the future, the above will be fully legal, and
> the resulting FSM database, which contains facts derived from OSM data
> but which were not in d
I could in theory make it, and I even considered it for about 10
seconds... but I couldn't think what I'd get out of it other than
frustration.
DRM for maps, sorry GeoDRM... what can you say but FAIL ?
Best
Steve
On 5 Jun 2009, at 08:10, Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Maybe this
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, SteveC wrote:
> I could in theory make it, and I even considered it for about 10
> seconds... but I couldn't think what I'd get out of it other than
> frustration.
>
> DRM for maps, sorry GeoDRM... what can you say but FAIL ?
>
> Best
>
> Steve
Trouble is, these people conti
