Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Legal or not? user srpskicrv and source = TOPO 25 VGI BEOGRAD

2010-10-03 Thread Frederik Ramm
Hi, On 10/03/2010 04:31 AM, John Smith wrote: None of those examples applies since it was a question about copyright ownership. I don't see why we should treat a nation state's laws about copyright any different than a nation state's idiosyncratic laws about maps or surveying. If you are in

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Legal or not? user srpskicrv and sou rce = TOPO 25 VGI BEOGRAD

2010-10-03 Thread Ed Avis
ed...@... writes: The argument is really 'Is the Serbian government the legal successor of the Yugoslav government in Serbian territories?' Yes, it is. (Serbia and Montenegro was the successor of Yugoslavia, and after Montenegrin independence a few years ago, Serbia is the successor state of

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Legal or not? user srpskicrv and source = TOPO 25 VGI BEOGRAD

2010-10-03 Thread Francis Davey
On 2 October 2010 23:29, ed...@billiau.net wrote: I think that the argument is not that. The argument is really 'Is the Serbian government the legal successor of the Yugoslav government in Serbian territories?' Would an international court give the rights to the Serbian government? I think

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OS Opendata the new license

2010-10-03 Thread Rob Myers
On 10/02/2010 12:18 AM, Dave F. wrote: Broadcasting the fact you think a contributor, who disagrees with you, should be banned purely because they have a nickname is: petty/puerile/childish/insecure/inept/pompous/arrogant That is not the argument. The argument is that various people on this

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OS Opendata the new license

2010-10-03 Thread Dave F.
On 03/10/2010 14:12, Rob Myers wrote: On 10/02/2010 12:18 AM, Dave F. wrote: Broadcasting the fact you think a contributor, who disagrees with you, should be banned purely because they have a nickname is: petty/puerile/childish/insecure/inept/pompous/arrogant That is not the argument. The

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OS Opendata the new license

2010-10-03 Thread Rob Myers
On 10/03/2010 03:12 PM, Dave F. wrote: Again, a statement with caveats included. It's an honest statement of the current situation as I understand it. To give you the precise answer that you want (Yes/No, OS data/traces are OK under the CTs/ODbL/DbCL) will take time and effort because it

[OSM-legal-talk] Nike Deja Vu

2010-10-03 Thread Julio Costa Zambelli
Last night a friend contacted me to told me that the guys from Nike Chile were using OpenStreetMap for the map of their weekend event Cruce de Chile, a 300Km Relay race from the top of the Andes in Portillo to Valparaiso in the Pacific Coast. At first when I checked the link [1] I was kind of

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Nike Deja Vu

2010-10-03 Thread 80n
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Julio Costa Zambelli julio.co...@openstreetmap.cl wrote: Last night a friend contacted me to told me that the guys from Nike Chile were using OpenStreetMap for the map of their weekend event Cruce de Chile, a 300Km Relay race from the top of the Andes in

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Legal or not? user srpskicrv and source = TOPO 25 VGI BEOGRAD

2010-10-03 Thread Matija Nalis
On Sat, 02 Oct 2010 17:48:39 +0200, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Hi, On 10/02/2010 03:43 PM, Ed Avis wrote: This is pretty clear, then: OSM also needs to be usable on Serbian territory, so it can't use the maps. Right... and OSM needs to be usable in India too, so it must show

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Legal or not? user srpskicrv and source = TOPO 25 VGI BEOGRAD

2010-10-03 Thread Matija Nalis
On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 09:41:00 +0100, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote: On 2 October 2010 23:29, ed...@billiau.net wrote: The argument is really 'Is the Serbian government the legal successor of the Yugoslav government in Serbian territories?' If (say) Serbia were to use OSMF or an OSM

[OSM-legal-talk] Checking if I understand correctly...

2010-10-03 Thread Steve Bennett
Hi, Is the following statement correct: Under the new Contributor Terms, you may only contribute to content to OSM that you own, or have been given authority to license to the OSMF for future relicensing. This is only slowly dawning on me. If this is correct, then we can no longer do imports of