On 22 December 2010 15:18, Niklas Cholmkvist wrote:
> Anthony wrote:
>> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Frederik Ramm
>> wrote:
>> >> This rule means that everything that is traced from Bing before OSM
>> stops
>> >> publishing under CC-BY-SA will be available to the world, forever,
>> under
On 23 December 2010 00:42, Anthony wrote:
> This interpretation (or at least, the acceptance of it as something
> OSM would want to do) is truly evil. I only wonder how widespread it
> is among OSM contributors. I hope in good faith that it is held by
> very few.
After turning the vote of OSM-F
>> > I certainly didn't read it that way. The Bing license says you must
>> > contribute traced data to openstreetmaps.org, but it doesn't say you
>> > can't also contribute traced data to a fork.
> After it has been contributed to openstreetmap.org, one can get it from
> openstreetmap.org(dump m
Anthony wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 10:48 AM, Frederik Ramm
> wrote:
> >> This rule means that everything that is traced from Bing before OSM
> stops
> >> publishing under CC-BY-SA will be available to the world, forever,
> under
> >> CC-BY-SA. But a hypothetical CC-BY-SA fork would not be
Dave F. writes:
> On 06/12/2010 09:55, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> >
> > The situation is sufficient for me to use Bing imagery for tracing.
> > I'm not looking at the legal side of it, I'm just looking at the size
> > of the PR disaster should Microsoft attempt to backtrack in any way.
> >
> >
- Original Message -
From: "Rob Myers"
To:
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2010 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing Terms
of Use?
On 12/19/2010 02:40 PM, David Groom wrote:
For the record
1) I accept that the Microsoft Licence
On 12/19/2010 02:40 PM, David Groom wrote:
For the record
1) I accept that the Microsoft Licence[1] to use Bing imagery is an
early version, and we have been told it will be revised
2) I suspect that Microsoft do intend that Bing imagery may be used to
update OSM
Sure.
And I accept that it wo
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 8:32 AM, 80n <80n...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In other words, this license makes no grants of rights to publish derived
> works
> under any particular license, over and above what was already there.
That's probably a combination of the fact that Microsoft doesn't own
that righ
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 3:29 PM, Grant Slater
wrote:
> On 19 December 2010 14:40, David Groom wrote:
> >>
> >> The licence PDF states:
> >>
> >> "Any updates you make to the OpenStreetMap map via the
> >> Application (even if not published to third parties) must be contributed
> >> back to openst
On 19 December 2010 14:40, David Groom wrote:
>>
>> The licence PDF states:
>>
>> "Any updates you make to the OpenStreetMap map via the
>> Application (even if not published to third parties) must be contributed
>> back to openstreetmaps.org."
>>
>
> Which is NOT the same as stating "Microsoft ha
To:
Sent: Sunday, December 19, 2010 11:39 AM
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Someone already had a look at the Bing Terms
of Use?
On 19/12/10 10:30, Andrew Harvey wrote:
Where is this direct statement from Microsoft that says derived
information from aerial imagery delivered through their map
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Rob Myers wrote:
> On 19/12/10 10:30, Andrew Harvey wrote:
>
>>
>> Where is this direct statement from Microsoft that says derived
>> information from aerial imagery delivered through their map api can be
>> licensed under a CT compatible license?
>>
>
> Microsof
On 19/12/10 10:30, Andrew Harvey wrote:
Where is this direct statement from Microsoft that says derived
information from aerial imagery delivered through their map api can be
licensed under a CT compatible license?
Microsoft have directly stated that Bing imagery may be used to update OSM.
Th
Hi,
Andrew Harvey wrote:
Where is this direct statement from Microsoft that says derived
information from aerial imagery delivered through their map api can be
licensed under a CT compatible license?
Strange wording - we're not looking for data that can be "licensed under
a CT compatible lice
On Sun, Dec 19, 2010 at 9:23 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> We have a direct statement from Microsoft saying it's ok to trace. If that's
> "no foundation other tahn a guess & a feeling" for you then you're free to
> refrain from using Bing imagery - however I think that's bad judgement on
> your part.
Dave,
Dave F. wrote:
I'm just catching up with this thread & can't believe what I've just
read. You bleat & whinge
... thanks ...
about people talking legal in other threads &
yet here, in legal, you admit that your advice to others that's it's OK
to trace Bing (under any license) has no fo
On 06/12/2010 09:55, Frederik Ramm wrote:
The situation is sufficient for me to use Bing imagery for tracing.
I'm not looking at the legal side of it, I'm just looking at the size
of the PR disaster should Microsoft attempt to backtrack in any way.
PR is more important than legal.
I'm just
On 12/06/2010 10:18 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
I suppose I don't mind if a license is technically invalid because of
some obscure legal reason, I just think that the intent needs to be
there, publicly, officially, and clearly stated on what they are okay
with and what they aren't. I don't think th
Andrew, Manuel -
On 12/06/2010 10:28 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote:
I feel that it is not safe at this point. I have raised my concerns in
this thread
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-December/005299.html
The situation is sufficient for me to use Bing imagery for tracing. I'
I feel that it is not safe at this point. I have raised my concerns in
this thread
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2010-December/005299.html
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 9:16 PM, Manuel Reimer
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> is it secure to use Bing? Any license risks? Could Microsoft, at some
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,
>>
>> How are they connected? please
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,
>
> How are they connected? please explain.
Because of the terms of the CT, I don't know if trac
Renaud MICHEL wrote:
Is it OK to use bing imagery when you have accepted the contributors term,
as I have explicitly accepted them (version 1.0), and every mapper who
registered after March 2010 (correct?) are also contributing under CT 1.0?
I also did so and I *want* my contributions to get OD
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
Le dimanche 05 décembre 2010 à 11:16, Manuel Reimer a écrit :
> is it secure to use Bing? Any license risks? Could Microsoft, at some
> day, just force us to remove everything with "source=Bing" on it? Am I
> forced to have this "source" tag there? Should stuff, taken from Bing,
> be verified via
Hello,
is it secure to use Bing? Any license risks? Could Microsoft, at some day, just
force us to remove everything with "source=Bing" on it? Am I forced to have this
"source" tag there? Should stuff, taken from Bing, be verified via GPS track at
some time to get the data secure?
One risk,
26 matches
Mail list logo
