On 25 August 2010 14:13, Richard Weait wrote:
> I'm surprised that some individuals in the community are pushing back
> so hard on "free and open" not being the right approach. Some would
Would that be GPL "free and open" of BSD "free and open" ?
As I said before, why is most software GPL when
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 9:21 PM, Simon Biber wrote:
> On Sun, 22 August, 2010 11:55:27 PM, Peteris Krisjanis
> wrote:
>
>> As I'm interested in keeping my data within OSM and find a common ground with
>>rest of you, I'm delighted to see that requests to specify 'free and open
>>license' in CT se
On Sun, 22 August, 2010 11:55:27 PM, Peteris Krisjanis wrote:
> As I'm interested in keeping my data within OSM and find a common ground with
>rest of you, I'm delighted to see that requests to specify 'free and open
>license' in CT section 3 has been taken into account[1]. Huge thanks and sorr
James Livingston writes:
> 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 -
On 08/24/2010 01:33 PM, SomeoneElse wrote:
On 24/08/2010 11:35, Ed Avis wrote:
... under the proposed ODbL or whether it would technically be in
breach of the
contract-law provisions
But presumably I as Joe Mapper wouldn't be restricted in going back to
the OS with a bunch of errors that I've f
On 24/08/2010 11:35, Ed Avis wrote:
... under the proposed ODbL or whether it would technically be in
breach of the
contract-law provisions
But presumably I as Joe Mapper wouldn't be restricted in going back to
the OS with a bunch of errors that I've found after comparing what I've
mapped wit
On 23/08/2010 01:34, Richard Weait wrote:
That's an open question for the lawyer that wrote the CT. In casual
conversation with one lawyer ("casual" as in I wasn't paying the
lawyer)
Thanks Richard. What we could do with from the LWG (and I'm sure that
they will look at doing it) is a "here ar
Jukka Rahkonen writes:
>It may be hard to give something back from OSM to many of the data
>providers. Public domain sources like USGS cannot take the updates
>because they are funded for producing public domain data
>(http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/2010-July/020016.html).
>Orda
On 24 August 2010 11:18, James Livingston 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 impor
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
On 23/08/2010, at 6:54 PM, Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
> It may be hard to give something back from OSM to many of the data
> providers. Public domain sources like USGS cannot take the updates
> because they are funded for producing public domain data
> (http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/dev/20
11 matches
Mail list logo
