? there are 4 responses to your mail, at least one with a question that
you haven't answered .
Am 19.11.2015 um 08:51 schrieb Lars-Daniel Weber:
> Three days are gone and still no discussion about this topic.
> I think, nobody is really interested in discovering license violations and
> pena
For those that do not read weeklyOSM/Wochennotiz (you really should)
http://curia.europa.eu/juris/celex.jsf?celex=62014CJ0490&lang1=de&type=TXT&ancre=
Simon
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@o
Hi,
On 11/19/2015 08:51 AM, Lars-Daniel Weber wrote:
> Three days are gone and still no discussion about this topic.
I think that as long as no external sources are used, and there's just a
clever preprocessing that runs a couple of spatial analyses on the OSM
data, generating other OSM data from
Frederik Ramm wrote on Donnerstag, 19. November 2015 um 13:46 Uhr:
>
> I would have a stronger opinion if it were a case where external data is
> mixed with OSM to create an "added value" product - but if someone just
> mangles the OSM data a bit, I'm tempted to view that as part of the
> rendering
Hi,
On 11/19/2015 04:04 PM, Lars-Daniel Weber wrote:
> The guidelines say that you need even to release the steps to create
> a derived database (or share the diff or share the database itself).
Yes, but the Trivial Transformations guideline[1] explains:
"We therefore define a term "trivial tran
Lars, can I ask what you're trying to achieve here? Do you believe the data
or processes have value? Are you uncertain how to replicate the
transformation steps yourself? If so, I suspect there are a number of
people in the community who'd be glad to help figure this out.
Given the trivial nature
