On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 12:40 PM, jean-christophe.haes...@dianosis.org wrote:
I found out recently about the license change issue, and I discover with
fear that everything looks decided. I feel I'm being rushed.
The licence discussion has been going on for a couple of *years* now.
It needs
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
OJ W wrote:
the ability to create an uncopiable map image from OSM data
does seem to have appeared in the ODbL license?
You can create an image and (provided that your image is not a data
base, a distinction that has
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 2:35 PM, OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 1:56 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
OJ W wrote:
the ability to create an uncopiable map image from OSM data
does seem to have appeared in the ODbL license?
You can create an image and
Hi,
Jean-Christophe Haessig wrote:
I surely understand that contributors’ names won’t disappear from OSM
itself, however with that clause, someone might make a copy of the
database, remove the names and redistribute it (only attributing to
OSM), which will in effect disable the users of this
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 believe
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 01:40:47PM +0100, jean-christophe.haes...@dianosis.org
wrote:
* Waivers : thankfully I cannot legally waive my moral rights in my
country, but I think it is unfair to require this form any person in the
world.
While I agree to collective attribution, I share some of
