On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 2:05 PM, David Groom revi...@pacific-rim.net wrote:
- Original Message - From: M?rtin Koppenhoefer
dieterdre...@gmail.com
To: Licensing and other legal discussions. legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 3:44 PM
Subject:
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Richard Weait rich...@weait.com wrote:
For example, a 'bot that does nothing but fix spelling in keys,
changes Amenity to amenity, but the 'bot does not answer the mandatory
relicensing question. Should we revert their changes back to Amenity?
As another
Frederik Ramm frede...@... writes:
I think you have understood this all right. In my eyes there's a wide
band between clearly non-copyrightable edits on one side (which we could
legally keep in OSM even if the person who added them said no - but
we're unlikely to exercise that right) and
Jukka,
Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
And of course we are using the same rules for taking and giving, or? Same
amounts of data we consider non-copyrightable and keep therefore in the database
can be taken out from the new ODbl-OSM database as if they were PD? And even
store masses of separate extracts
Andrzej,
andrzej zaborowski wrote:
You may also want to take into account the automatic database rights
in some users' contributions (even if not copyrightable), which iirc
are not disclaimed by CC-By-SA 2 unported.
If we assume there to be such rights (and there might well be!), would
this
- Original Message -
From: Richard Weait rich...@weait.com
To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 11:32 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] legal FAQ license
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 4:05 PM, David Groom
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 4:50 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
If one million
users each make a non-copyrightable contribution to OSM under CC-BY-SA then
I can take those one million contributions and use them in any way I want
because if they are not copyrightable then CC-BY-SA
