Le samedi 21 mars 2009 à 19:02 +0100, Ulf Möller a écrit :
> Thinh Nguyen of Creative Commons has posted detailed comments on the
> ODbL on the co-ment website.
A large part of this comment focuses on the complexity of the ODbL.
While simplicity is better, I think we should be allowed a reasonabl
Le dimanche 08 mars 2009 à 22:49 +0100, Frederik Ramm a écrit :
Hi,
> Maybe those who advised you hoped that you would read the ongoing
> discussion before posting ;-)
Well, I read it, but I felt that the idea was rather dimly suggested…
> Current ODbL mandates[*]that the derivative database
Hello,
I posted a comment on co-ment and on the wiki use cases page, where it
didn’t seem to belong. I was advised to post it here, so here it is, and
please forgive me for the cross-posting if any of you have already read
it. Anyway, that idea seemed to hover around in the last thread.
In its cu
Le lundi 02 mars 2009 à 14:14 +0100, Frederik Ramm a écrit :
> No. If that were the case then OSM would have gone PD long ago and we
> would all be mapping happily instead of wasting our time trying to
> create freedom from the barrel of a license (kudos to JohnW for this
> phrase).
Ok, I beli
Le lundi 02 mars 2009 à 13:28 +0100, Iván Sánchez Ortega a écrit :
> > The Factual information license, seems to be a bit schizophrenic. It says
Huh? Now there are two licenses?
> > both that facts are free, and that these free facts cannot be used without
> > including a license...
Facts are f
