On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Jukka Rahkonen
jukka.rahko...@mmmtike.fiwrote:
Will all contents of OSM year 2009 database be in public domain first of
January, 2025?
The database directive gives 15 years of protection for a dump of a
database. As long as the database is updated, the
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 11:27 AM, Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.netwrote:
It isn't legal, because the locations are derived from Google Maps.
This is basically a mashup based on Google Maps. I was unaware that Google
have claimed any rights over POIs added in such mashups (Google My Maps
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Joel joelheeth...@gmail.com wrote:
They do hold the rights to the location of the POIs when based on Google
maps.
I have tried to find something in their terms that verifies this, but have
not found anything. Could you please be a bit more specific?
Even if
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 8:36 PM, Grant Slater openstreet...@firefishy.comwrote:
There has been some discussion of adding a tag into the planet.osm
header detailing that the data is licensed.
Also adding some contract text on http://planet.openstreetmap.org/ to
cover our non-eu-database-right
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 8:47 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Quoting 4.2 (b)
[You must] Include a copy of this Licence [...] or
its Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) [...] both in the Database [...]
and in any relevant documentation
Sorry, overlooked that.
If this is in the
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:03 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Not so, it turns out; the Produced Work freedom allows us to combine
OSM data *only* with other data whose license does not prohibit the
addition of constraints, because ODbL mandates that we add the reverse
engineering
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 4:01 PM, Iván Sánchez Ortega
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Temporary files (or information arranged in memory) in your computer are
considered databases, so I'd go with option 1.
To be protectec under the database directive, you need to make a
significant investment for the
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 5:52 PM, Rob Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Would it be possible for CC to offer a licence transition clause for
large scale open geodata projects in the same way the FSF has
offered an FDL - BY-SA get out for Wikipedia in the current minor FDL
revision?
Well... If I
On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 6:56 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
That would entail arguing that map data is uncopyrightable while at
the same time transitioning the OSM map data to a new copyright
license. It's not feasible.
Database protection can exists even if copyright
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Rob Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Wikipedia version is the best current PD Dedication but I really
would recommend waiting on CC Zero.
CC Zero explicitly mentions database rights, which I think is a good thing,
but I would be ahppy with the Wikipedia
On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 1:08 PM, Peter Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
I am very sure it is not allowed. If it was allowed then Ed would have made
that clear on any number of occasions recently, notably at SOTM and at
FOSS.
I have never met Ed, so I will have to do with reading their
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Iván Sánchez Ortega
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
Nope. Even one single node is subject to copyright... *tracing* (let it be
on
top of aerial imagery, or on top of GPS traces) is currently considered an
intellectual work, so you have IP rights over it. At least in
12 matches
Mail list logo
