-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 24/03/11 13:13, Simon Poole wrote:
>
> The issue wrt to the wording is if to use a strong "must not infringe"
> vs. a weak "should not infringe" (in the German translation).
This would be an issue if the document stated that it uses the
definition
I was referring to the 1.2.4 French translation
http://www.osmfoundation.org/images/c/c2/2011-03-08_OSM_Contributor_Terms_1.2.4_FrenchTranslation.pdf
What you have is the translation of 1.0.
The issue wrt to the wording is if to use a strong "must not infringe"
vs. a weak "should not infringe
Francis, have a nice holiday.
Simon
PS: I'm actually completly with you on the interpretation, the issue is
that we have a large body of mappers that are German CS students, that
just love arguing subtle points, and in formal specifications must,
shall, should, etc. have very different meanin
On 3/24/2011 5:40 AM, Francis Davey wrote:
Also puzzling is the distinction in clause 1. The first sentence says:
"Dans le cas où des Contenus comprennent des éléments soumis à un
droit d’auteur, Vous acceptez de n’ajouter que des Contenus dont Vous
possédez la propriété intellectuelle."
I am
On 24 March 2011 13:27, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>
> http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms/FR
>
Excellent. Its nice not to have to work from PDF's.
--
Francis Davey
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http:
On 24 March 2011 13:13, Simon Poole wrote:
>
> I was referring to the 1.2.4 French translation
>
> http://www.osmfoundation.org/images/c/c2/2011-03-08_OSM_Contributor_Terms_1.2.4_FrenchTranslation.pdf
>
> What you have is the translation of 1.0.
>
> The issue wrt to the wording is if to use a stro
Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> [some stuff]
Apparently CT 1.2.4 in French have just this moment gone live:
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms/FR
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-Request-for-clarification-for-G
Francis Davey wrote:
> I hope that makes sense and is not too mad.
Absolutely. I guess what the Wikipedia article tells us is that informally
(if incorrectly) one is often called the other and that, perhaps, is where
the confusion in the French translation lies.
cheers
Richard
--
View this mes
On 24 March 2011 09:46, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
> Francis Davey wrote:
>> "droit d'auteur" does not (as I understand the term) include
>> database right. Its un droit des producteurs de bases de données
>> rather than un droit d'auteur (forgive my atrocious French - its been
>> nearly 30 years si
Francis Davey wrote:
> "droit d'auteur" does not (as I understand the term) include
> database right. Its un droit des producteurs de bases de données
> rather than un droit d'auteur (forgive my atrocious French - its been
> nearly 30 years since I studied it).
Nearly 20 years here, but FWIW, http
On 24 March 2011 09:17, Simon Poole wrote:
>
> Thomas Ineichen has been so nice to update the (unofficial) German
> translation to 1.2.4
> (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Open_Database_License/Contributor_Terms).
> There is a small mater of dispute wrt to the intent of the English original
Thomas Ineichen has been so nice to update the (unofficial) German
translation to 1.2.4
(http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Open_Database_License/Contributor_Terms).
There is a small mater of dispute wrt to the intent of the English
original in 1 (a):
"your contribution of data should no
12 matches
Mail list logo
