What is the consensus on the legal status of an object that has been
created by a non-agreer, but all of the nodes and all of the tags have
been deleted/changed by agreers?
i.e.:
1) Non-agreer creates a way with tags 'name=A' and 'highway=tertiary',
and 3 nodes (with no tags).
2) An agreer
On 2 February 2012 15:11, Robert Kaiser ka...@kairo.at wrote:
andrzej zaborowski schrieb:
Yes, of course, I think it is Mike DuPont who said give away. But
obviously we're talking about the grant of rights.
Yes, every open soruce license is a grant of rights, as that's the basic
definition
On 2 February 2012 13:43, Woll Newall w...@2-islands.com wrote:
What is the consensus on the legal status of an object that has been created
by a non-agreer, but all of the nodes and all of the tags have been
deleted/changed by agreers?
i.e.:
1) Non-agreer creates a way with tags 'name=A'
OK, so spelling corrections could be viewed as not removing the taint,
because we can't tell if the agreer making the change used a
odbl/CT-compatible source for the change or not.
Thinking about it, other edits done by bots to normalise the tagging into
a standard (e.g. changing something like
