Sorry to bring this up again, but I accidentally accepted the contributor
terms on my h4ck3rm1k3 account
and I cannot do that because not all the data that I had there is cleared
for the new license. I stopped using that account a while back.
I would like to have the settings turned back.
I tried t
Reading http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/%C3%96pnvkarte
and the talk page, I would assume that what you are interested in is
the rendering styles. The data seems to be from OSM. I am not sure
that you would have a legal standing to request them. Only if he used
AGPL licensed styles would you be a
On the copyright page I see credit for various places who donate data.
Would it be possible to give credit to the state of nj if they donate
data to satisfy them?
mike
--
James Michael DuPont
Kansas Linux Fest http://kansaslinuxfest.us
Free/Libre Open Source and Open Knowledge Association of Kans
the data is creative commons we can't use it. We can't neither fulfill
> the attribution nor is it compatible with the contributor terms which
> allows changing the license.
>
> Stephan
>
> On April 19, 2014 5:19:54 PM CEST, Mike Dupont <
> jamesmikedup...@googlemai
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 8:00 PM, Richard Weait wrote:
> Well no, Mike, I don't think so. What rights a publisher grants to
> Wikipedia has nothing to do with what rights a publisher grants to
> OpenStreetMap. Wikipedia has no ownership interest in OpenStreetMap,
> nor vice-versa.
>
If wikipedi
the wikipedia has a nice otrs system, I supposed you could use it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:OTRS
so let them sign something that allows the data to be used by wikipedia and
that should cover osm as well.
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 10:01 AM, Eric Jiang wrote:
> Greetings,
> I am inter
>> Hi Bekim,
>>
>> If nobody else gives you feedback I will do so next week. I am away at the
>> moment.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Michael Collinson
>>
>>
>>
>> On 20 Sep 2012, at 19:11, Bekim Kajtazi wrote:
>>
>> Thanks Mike,
&
Hello,
Would putting the data in osm be in violation of the kansas law K.S.A.
45-220(c)(2)?
http://kansasstatutes.lesterama.org/Chapter_45/Article_2/45-230.html
K.S.A. 45-220(c)(2): "the requester does not intend to, and will not: (A)
Use any list of names or addresses contained in or derived f
Hi all,
We need only 6 more signatures for the apple petition :
http://www.change.org/petitions/apple-inc-uphold-the-terms-of-cc-by-sa-2-0-license
please sign and share! If you ask yourself what use it is, the point
is that we can try and put public pressure onto apple.
mike
--
James Michael DuP
Hi there,
I would like to ask you all to consider to sign my petition for apple to
disclose their usage of OSM :
http://www.change.org/petitions/apple-inc-uphold-the-terms-of-cc-by-sa-2-0-license
thanks,
mike
--
James Michael DuPont
Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.
tible as it does not distinguish between derived
> and produced works.
>
> On Sep 20, 2012, at 11:26 AM, Michael Collinson wrote:
>
>> On 20/09/2012 07:32, Mike Dupont wrote:
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>> I have a question about imports and the ODBl,
&g
is the starting point?
>
> I am ready to approve, sign, confirm anything required!
>
> Best,
> Bekim
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Mike Dupont
> wrote:
>>
>> Bekim,
>> I have been working on understanding the new license even today.
>>
Bekim,
I have been working on understanding the new license even today.
it is cc-by-sa + database rights (odbl) + the right for osm to change
the licence at will in the future.
basically you need to grant the osm the rights to use the data,
Michael can give you more info about this,
thanks,
mike
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Michael Collinson wrote:
> If you have any particular case, the LWG will be happy to work with you on
> it.
well my case is to translate the terms into Albanian and go back to
people who donated data and try and ask them to sign off on it, there
are different case
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Michael Collinson wrote:
> () The CTs where written carefully to say, "If you contribute Contents, You
> are indicating that, as far as You know, You have the right to authorize
> OSMF to use and distribute those Contents under our current licence terms."
> "curren
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Stephan Knauss wrote:
> This is a good reason to have contributor terms.
the contributor terms introduce more problems, like the fact that it
prevents anyone from importing any derived works.
lets say i download the new cc-by-sa+odbl database make changes and
publ
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Mike Dupont
wrote:
> that is different than to ask for the CT which is my eyes basically a
> copyright assignment to the osmf, I cannot understand that or explain
And to add in one more point, I dont want to have to go back again and
again to donors aski
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:06 PM, David Groom wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "convince people to add the odbl
> clause to people providing data".
I mean I asked people to give us the data under cc-by-sa, and now i
would have to go back and ask for the odbl database rights, tha
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Stephan Knauss wrote:
> Could we create a special version of the Contributor Terms for data
> donations? So they could sign it. We could mail it to the OSMF to keep the
> records.
This was my idea from today, make a clause like the GPL has, v2 or any
future versio
Hi there,
I have a question about imports and the ODBl,
I see that some sources have decided to dual license the data
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue
But how can some third parties data be compatible when the CT says it
can change any time, surly they might be compatible with
this is a topic for legal.
the content is no longer cc-by-sa,
it is OdBL
On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 7:44 AM, Frans Thamura wrote:
> i want the Osmosa also in that text
>
> content CCA from OSM
> server hosted in osmosa.net
>
> any idea?
>
> F
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 14, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Alex Rollin wrot
I second that translation and give you an example here that has a
similar anti commercial clause in spanish and english :
Original : prohibida toda comercialización, even I can translate that
: prohibition of commercialization.
here is the page i found :
http://www.visitacostadelsol.com/living/a
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 9:51 PM, Apollinaris Schöll wrote:
> They can claim what they want. Even if you sign such a contract it is not
> valid. It's called employer and not slave driver. No court will enforce such
> a contract.
Mr Schöll,
I have hear otherwise, first of all if you sign a contact
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 7:14 AM, Paul Norman wrote:
> If someone is unable to sign the CTs because they don't hold copyright over
> their contributions then they'd be unable to legally contribute to OSM or
> any open mapping project regardless of the CTs.
>
> If someone is not working in a GIS fie
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:14 PM, Pavel Pisa wrote:
> even recent discussions about ODBl compatibility with Wikipedia
> problems shows that there can be problems or complications
> with ODBL only licensed data.
+1
This is what has been concerning me for a while.
--
James Michael DuPont
Member
On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 6:20 AM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert
Gremmen wrote:
> For me the CT has been a problem.
> I principally refuse to sign a contract where I can be held legally
> responsible
> for data I contribute for free; where the other party engages itself to
> nothing at all,
>
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 8:05 PM, Phil! Gold wrote:
> CC-BY-SA is similar
> in broad terms (you must license the mixed database to the user under
> CC-BY-SA), but lacks the details more specific to datasets, like the
> reasonable-format requirement.
Can you provide more information on this?
mike
On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 12:38 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> all
> the problems we had with the license change
>
Lets be clear here, I think the problems is not because of the license
change, but the contributor terms , ( the click through license and the
mass collection of all IP rights by the OSF)
is this possible? that would be great for continuing with cc-by-sa.
mike
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 10:47 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> I was personally thinking of just publishing the full planet the same
> way it is published today
>
--
James Michael DuPont
Member of Free Libre Open Source
Hi there,
I also have these concerns, and am really interested in the resolution.
mike
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 10:14 PM, Pavel Pisa wrote:
> Dear OSMF responsible,
>
> even recent discussions about ODBl compatibility with Wikipedia
> problems shows that there can be problems or complications
>
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 6:33 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> (If anyone wants to pursue this discussion I would very much ask them to
> peruse the mailing list archives with the search term "reverse engineering"
> and read up on past discussions so that we don't have to repeat ourselves.)
Ok, thanks
On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 6:10 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> No. The Produced Work you create is uploaded to Wikipedia under CC-BY-SA
> and that's all that counts. CC-BY-SA would not allow additional conditions
> (e.g. the making available of a source database) anyway. The "Created from
> OdBL-license
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 9:22 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> On 28 May 2012 23:03, Mike Dupont wrote:
>> moving the discussion to legal
>>
>> On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 8:02 PM, andrzej zaborowski
>> wrote:
>>> Copying and pasting is not a copyright infringeme
moving the discussion to legal
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 8:02 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
> Copying and pasting is not a copyright infringement. The Contributor
> Terms don't require that the data inserted into the database be
> compatible with ODbL -- only the current licensing terms, which sti
the stylesheets to map elements.
mke
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <
dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Am 11. April 2012 00:06 schrieb Mike Dupont <
> jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com>:
> > and this on the copyright of css :
> > http://b0x0rz
I am going to explain my viewpoint on this.
My understanding of copyleft is the idea that people who own the
rights to their own work license it freely.
Other people who license that work via copyleft are then allowed to
create derived works, and adding in value create new works that are
again red
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 1:01 AM, Nathan Edgars II wrote:
> On 1/27/2012 6:48 PM, Nick Whitelegg wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Mike and Graham,
>>
>> >We should not assume that contributors' acceptance of the new licence
>> means that they are particularly in favour of it - they may have just
>> accepted bec
That is an excellent question Stefan d. k., very good. Also
considering that the previous stance was that wikipedia should not be
imported at all because it is mostly derived from non free sources.
Also I wonder why this mail is being sent to talk, about licensing,
should be on legal anyway?
mike
On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 9:25 PM, Rob Myers wrote:
> On 19/01/12 09:51, Mike Dupont wrote:
>> Same here, the OSM is pressuring me to accept the CT which would
>> amount to prejury
>
> If you cannot accept the CTs please don't. Nobody wants you to make a
> false
Same here, the OSM is pressuring me to accept the CT which would
amount to prejury for imported CC-BY-SA data
again here is my statement, I am still getting spam mails from bots on
accepting the license.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/user/James%20Michael%20DuPont/diary/15777
mike
On Wed, Jan 18, 2
Hi, landsat is already available in a josm plugin
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Landsat
i dont know if what you are planning to buy is better than that,
thanks,
mike
On Sun, Jan 8, 2012 at 3:10 PM, Mike N wrote:
>
> I'm wondering if it would be legal to trace from LandSat.com aerials. Of
>
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 1:21 PM, Ed Avis wrote:
> Simon Poole poole.ch> writes:
>
>>The "upgrade clause" in 4.b of CC-by-SA 2.0
>>
>>a) only applies to a Derivative Work. While this is only a small hurdle
>>to surmount, it does mean that it doesn't apply to a one-to-one copy of
>>the work
>>
>>b)
FYI, cc 4 is open for discussion.
mike
-- Forwarded message --
From: Kat Walsh
Date: Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 9:37 PM
Subject: [Foundation-l] Creative Commons wants your input on the 4.0
license process
To: Wikimedia Foundation Mailing List
, Wikimedia Commons Discussion List
, Engli
It looks like we are going to need tools to look for checking
"relicensed" nodes here. Do we have have CPU for that? I need
hosting.
thanks,
mike
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:21 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Gert Gremmen wrote:
>> Using this O-trick violates the copyright of the previous
>> owner,
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:09 PM, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Simon Poole wrote:
>> That said, I believe P2 now has a tool that will completly replace
>> a node with a new one at the same coordinates which is a bit of
>> a fix for your specific issue.
>
> Just for clarification - what it actually do
Well, I see my name on that list, as to my contributions to germany I really
dont care if you re license them, there is no issue with them like the
kosovo data.
thanks,
mike
On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Simon Poole wrote:
> As was to be expected, there was at least one bug in the script :-/
Me too, I would like to fix some bugs, why am I locked out?
mike
On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 08:03:16PM +0200, Nic Roets wrote:
> > Gert, if you are so sure of that, open a new account and use that
> instead.
> > At the very least you will stil
Tobias,
thank you for writing this. It seems you are speaking from the hearts of
many people.
thanks,
mike
On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Tobias Knerr wrote:
> I apologize in advance for distracting everyone's attention from mapping
> and other pleasures with a long mail about licenses. Howeve
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 4:57 AM, John Smith wrote:
> > Person A also should do as much as they can to make sure any potential
> > Person C is aware of the intention. In the case of OSM, it helps that
> it's
> > the largest open map data project - it's likely anyone thinking of
> creating
> > a ma
On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Kai Krueger wrote:
> It is kind of ironic that people who use the "accept the CT question" to
> "vote on the transition to ODBL" get told that this is not a vote if they
> think ODBL is the correct licence for OSM but that they should only indicate
> if they will ac
getting into a debate about whether ODBL is the
> best licence for OSM data here. However, I do feel the need to correct
> one very important factual point regarding the Contributor Terms.
>
> On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 06:20 +0200, "Mike Dupont"
> wrote:
>
>> This proc
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 6:12 PM, Stephan Knauss wrote:
> On 05.06.2011 02:09, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>>
>> means for them. I know for a fact that among the current disagreeing
>> mappers there are some who intend to stay with OSM and who are just
>> holding out until the last minute; and I know there
On Sun, May 15, 2011 at 5:45 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> Funny, based on my last question, the OSM will not be able to use
>> cc-by-sa data in the future.
>
> Some say that we aren't able to use CC-BY-SA data now because we cannot
> provide proper attribution.
I would be willing to looking into
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Rob Myers wrote:
> On 05/14/2011 06:01 PM, Mike Dupont wrote:
>>
>> Funny, based on my last question, the OSM will not be able to use
>> cc-by-sa data in the future.
>
> Hence the question, I imagine. :-)
>
> PDDL/CC0 for the d
Funny, based on my last question, the OSM will not be able to use
cc-by-sa data in the future.
mike
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 6:49 PM, Kolossos
wrote:
> This september will be a relative large event from Wikimedia-side across
> europe: "Wiki Loves Monuments". It is a public photo contest around
> m
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 11:01 AM, pec...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hi everyone!
>
> To clarify my criticism/confusion with CT:
>
> 1) I'm not against ODbL. It is nice idea and I wholeheartedly support it;
> 2) I'm not against general idea of CT, I understand why it is needed;
>
> My confusion and problem
ract the attention
> of closed up companies, and as such, is a good thing. Thank you!
> Andrei
>
> 2010/12/8 Mike Dupont
>>
>> I dont think I can asnwer this question, my i suggest to write the
>> wikitravel or wikipeida articles and then to send them to the
>>
and tons of data about tons and tons of
> companies, while knowing that the data I am importing, is absolutely
> certain to be free of use. Because, as always, transit companies would wake
> up only when the amount of overall collected data would make the financial
> compensations and pen
y can or not!
> Andrei
>
> 2010/12/8 Mike Dupont
>>
>> I found a reference to albatrans here,
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stations_of_the_Paris_RER
>>
>> just add this information to wikipedia.
>>
>> see also here :
>> http://wiki
y on
> transiki, according to French law or British law, or any other law, without
> having to ask permission to do so?
> Thanks
> Andrei
> PS: was that more specific than my previous message?
> 2010/12/8 Mike Dupont
>>
>> Hi,
>> I would suggest that the devil
Hi,
I would suggest that the devil is in the details, please be specific.
my I suggest that you write a wikipeidia article about the agency or
wikitravel page about the timeplan/schedule and I will review it.
mike
On Wed, Dec 8, 2010 at 3:43 AM, Andrei Klochko
wrote:
> Hello again,
> This time,
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Renaud MICHEL wrote:
> Le dimanche 05 décembre 2010 à 11:49, Mike Dupont a écrit :
>> On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Renaud MICHEL
> wrote:
>> > Is it OK to use bing imagery when you have accepted the contributors
>> > term,
>&g
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Renaud MICHEL wrote:
> Is it OK to use bing imagery when you have accepted the contributors term,
How are they connected? please explain.
thanks,
mike
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://list
s which actually say that
> derived information can be copyrighted by the tracer and released
> under something CC BY-SA 2.0 compatible, or something to the same
> effect.
>
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 8:55 PM, Mike Dupont
> wrote:
>> HI Andrew,
>> I am also worried a
At the time of my writing Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 6:59 AM CET is when I
was working on that, there was no mention of this other license, at
least I did not see it.
Sorry for misleading,
mike
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 11:10 PM, Anthony wrote:
>> On
I have highlighted and commented on points from the bing Tou for discussion
http://osmopenlayers.blogspot.com/2010/11/interesting-points-from-bing-bind.html
thanks,
mike
--
James Michael DuPont
Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania
flossk.org flossal.org
__
On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 8:51 PM, Andreas Perstinger
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> sorry for my probably stupid question, but I'm rather new to OSM and still
> learning :-).
>
> As I understand it, we build a database which we fill with coordinates and
> their tags. Because of the license change some (or most o
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 4:06 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Do you *really* think it is right to say: What's mine is mine, and if those
> 100 people in 10 years make any step that I don't like then I will withdraw
> my work from under them?
please stop at this point.
We are not talking about withdr
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Olaf Schmidt-Wischhöfer
wrote:
> I contributed to
> OpenStreetMap because it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA. I would never have
> contributed under a license that says: "All your work is now ours. You give up
> all control. Bugger off if you disagree."
AMEN.
that
ke-und-Illegalitaet-2_32415779.html
http://www.chip.de/ii/180024129_e9575be830.jpg
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 10:41 PM, Mike Dupont <
jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> well the flash image moves around and shows more data. but ok. maybe they
> are not tiles, but one tile. anyway..
>
>
well the flash image moves around and shows more data. but ok. maybe they
are not tiles, but one tile. anyway..
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> Mike Dupont wrote:
>
>> I just saw this , very interesting.
>>
>> http://o
Hi,
I just saw this , very interesting.
http://osmopenlayers.blogspot.com/2010/11/httpmobilespyde-is-using-unattributed.html
Mobile Spy and Akamai are using unattributed osm tiles in flash ads.
--
James Michael DuPont
Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania flossk.org
flossa
Hi, there, the site
http://www.yakaz.com has an osm map and displays
"Partial Map data CC-BY-SA OpenStreetMap contributors" on the webpage,
but not on the map.
Luca has posted a comment about this and sent this to my attention :
http://blog.yakaz.com/2010/11/welcome-on-the-new-yakaz.html#comments
On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Simon Ward wrote:
> In any case, if I host my data elsewhere, and then “import” it into
> OpenStreetMap, do I get around this, or am I just being too hopeful?
yes, setup a company in the bahamas that holds all intellectual rights
of yours, that company would licen
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 8:28 PM, Kai Krueger wrote:
> "If you want to import data copyrighted by others or where they are exerting
> a copyright over data that you have derived by a method such as tracing, the
> copyright should be compatible with ODbL 1.0. You do not need to guarantee
> that the
On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 7:25 PM, John Smith wrote:
> On 30 October 2010 00:07, Mike Dupont wrote:
>> I have written to the people who donated the data to dual license it
>> under the oodbl as well as under the creative commons.
>> http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/o
Hi,
I have been reading more about how to deal with the licenses of
Albania and Kosovo data we have been acquiring.
I must admit, I am still skeptical about this new license, but after
re-reading it a few times, it might work.
The basic idea is that it is codifying what is implicit in copyright
l
77 matches
Mail list logo