Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

On 27/09/15 22:54, Alex Barth wrote: On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Paul Norman > wrote: On 9/22/2015 4:26 PM, Alex Barth wrote: Overall, I'd love to see us moving towards a share alike interpretation that applies to "OSM as the map" and allows f

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ASTER or no ASTER?

On 06/07/12 14:30, Frederik Ramm wrote: Hi, I'm slowly getting a headache from trying to find out wheter the use of ASTER data (for hillshading) in the creation of CC-BY-SA licensed map tiles is permissible or not. There are people who say that ASTER is only free for science and educatio

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] MoU between OSM and NLSF

that. I pick this title "Memorandum of Understanding", because it's widely known term and make sense about spirit of the document. I'm open to change title of the document, if you have good one. Rgs, Pekka Pekka Sarkola – pekka.sark...@gispo.fi – www.gispo.fi --

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] MoU between OSM and NLSF

On 03/07/12 17:02, Pekka Sarkola wrote: Dear Friends, I have prepared with National Land Survey of Finland Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) about usage of their datasets by OpenStreetMap activists. Hare is current draft text for everybody to comment: Memorandum of Understanding This Memo

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Response from Hampshire County Council

"Robert Whittaker (OSM)" wrote: >On 11 June 2012 18:12, Chris Hill wrote: >> That is not true. LWG did not get 'specific agreement' from OS. We >are >> simply using OS OpenData in compliance with the OS OpenData licence >and OS >> confirmed:

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Response from Hampshire County Council

On 11/06/12 17:16, David Groom wrote: - Original Message - From: "Martin Koppenhoefer" To: "Licensing and other legal discussions." Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Response from Hampshire County Council 2012/6/11 Nick Whitelegg : In answer to the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] What happens on April 1?

On 07/03/12 15:45, andrzej zaborowski wrote: I was wondering why people think that. Even trying to put myself in place of someone who thinks the license change is the best thing since sliced bread I still can't see the reasons for remapping. First of all it costs more work than adding data from

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

To be clear, I did not describe OS data as crap, I described the *quality* of data only based on OS StreetView with no extra surveyed data as crap. So you think that only experienced OSmers add shops, churches, schools, footpaths, cycletracks ... ? In the Hull area there are about 120 roads

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

ke...@cordina.org.uk wrote: OK, so transferring data isn't as academically pleasing as gaining a GPS trace and basing a map on that, but I don't see how a road in OSM from OS data is worse than no road being present. Gathering data for OSM on the ground is so much more than just the track o

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using img OSM data

davidss wrote: > I have absolutely no experience with OSM sort of data and its mapping tools > (I have just registered in OSM few mins ago), Im used to work with MP > format in Mapedit and cgpsmapper. For sure decompiling IMG is not the best > way but I found that link with those free download IMG

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] is this usage of osm a violation of cc-by-sa?

Jonas Stein wrote: > http://www.troiki.de/karte.jpg > http://www.troiki.de/anfahrt.html > > if so, should someone contact troiki and explain > how to use the osm maps correct. > > They don't have any attribution on the pages, otherwise is the kind of use of OSM I would hope to see. If my scho

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Non-existant streets

Write a Wiki page showing the progress of the area. You can make comments there. cheers, Chris - Original Message > From: John Smith > To: Licensing and other legal discussions. > Sent: Wednesday, 12 August, 2009 11:55:07 > Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Non-existant streets > >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Telephone Debate

For Pity's sake Fred, give it a rest! cheers, Chris - Original Message > From: Frederik Ramm > To: Licensing and other legal discussions. > Sent: Thursday, 12 March, 2009 8:32:19 > Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Telephone Debate > > Hi, > > SteveC wrote: > > In the past co