Am 28.01.2012 08:47, schrieb Mike Dupont:
then I determined that I will not be able to accept the terms because
someone, who is a Hasardeur in my humble opinion, decided to break
compatiblity with the existing license and then, break from the idea
that I own my data and ask me to hand over
2012/1/29 Dirk-Lüder Kreie osm-l...@deelkar.net:
demotivated by the data loss. but filling in gaps is really much
quicker done than starting from scratch.
+1, at least there already are tags for most things, comfortable
editors and lots of experienced mappers ;-)
cheers,
Martin
2012/1/29 Dirk-Lüder Kreie osm-l...@deelkar.net:
I sort-of feel responsible for my areas of the map, but I wouldn't go
so far as to call it my data. I contribute to this map, because I want
free and open Geodata, for that to occur you need to put your data into
the hands of the community of
I am going to explain my viewpoint on this.
My understanding of copyleft is the idea that people who own the
rights to their own work license it freely.
Other people who license that work via copyleft are then allowed to
create derived works, and adding in value create new works that are
again
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Mike Dupont
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote:
I am just explaining the legal basis behind copyright and copyleft :
Copyright says that I own all my work and you have no right to copy
it, copyleft says you are allowed to copy it under certain conditions
On 29 January 2012 09:03, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
I'm sure it is going to be tackled one way or the other but it really
isn't the big issue some people seem to make of it. Splitting ways is a
common thing but it is only relevant for the license change if an agreer
splits a
