Hi,
Lauri Hahne wrote:
> I think the problem here is that our own definition of substantial is
> by no means binding. The definition of substantial in ODbL comes
> pretty straight from EU's database directive and the definition is
> ultimately up to courts to decide.
You are right but what do you
Lauri Hahne wrote:
> I think the problem here is that our own definition of substantial is
> by no means binding. The definition of substantial in ODbL comes
> pretty straight from EU's database directive and the definition is
> ultimately up to courts to decide.
>
I should have been clearer.
T
2009/5/5 Lauri Hahne :
> I think the problem here is that our own definition of substantial is
> by no means binding. The definition of substantial in ODbL comes
> pretty straight from EU's database directive and the definition is
> ultimately up to courts to decide.
>
I'm reluctant to poke my nos
I think the problem here is that our own definition of substantial is
by no means binding. The definition of substantial in ODbL comes
pretty straight from EU's database directive and the definition is
ultimately up to courts to decide.
--
Lauri Hahne
2009/5/5 Grant Slater :
> Legal,
>
> The OD
Legal,
The ODbL (potential future OpenStreetMap license) relies on the meaning
of "Substantial".
The ODbL 1.0rc defines it as:
"Substantial" - Means substantial in terms of quantity or quality or a
combination of both. The repeated and systematic Extraction or
Re-utilisation of insubstantial p
