Re: [OSM-legal-talk] UK mapping authority switches to Open Government Licence (was: CTs and the 1 April deadline)

2011-01-09 Thread Ben Last
On 7 January 2011 21:56, Mike Collinson wrote: > In the case of Nearmap, it is my understanding, Ben might like to comment > or contradict, that level 1 is livable with. The real concern being the > possible that future OSM generations might want to drop share-alike. > It's indeed true that our

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] UK mapping authority switches to Open Government Licence (was: CTs and the 1 April deadline)

2011-01-07 Thread John Smith
On 8 January 2011 01:33, Mike Collinson wrote: > The practice appears limited to Australia and New Zealand. The last figures > I compiled for OSM data imports are: >From what I've been told privately by people on the inside is that they're not happy that they've been "encouraged" to share at al

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] UK mapping authority switches to Open Government Licence (was: CTs and the 1 April deadline)

2011-01-07 Thread Mike Collinson
At 02:20 PM 7/01/2011, John Smith wrote: >On 7 January 2011 23:56, Mike Collinson wrote: >> requirement. Since the Australian government, virtually alone, publishes > >I was under the assumption that the NZ govt, if not many others, >published data under the same/similar license. Thanks, I'll fo

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] UK mapping authority switches to Open Government Licence (was: CTs and the 1 April deadline)

2011-01-07 Thread John Smith
On 7 January 2011 23:56, Mike Collinson wrote: > requirement. Since the Australian government, virtually alone, publishes I was under the assumption that the NZ govt, if not many others, published data under the same/similar license. ___ legal-talk ma

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] UK mapping authority switches to Open Government Licence (was: CTs and the 1 April deadline)

2011-01-07 Thread Mike Collinson
At 08:36 PM 6/01/2011, John Smith wrote: >On 7 January 2011 05:25, Mike Collinson wrote: >> Nope. Clause 4 survives any license changes in the future, it is nothing to >> do with the end user license: >> >> 4. At Your or the copyright owner’s holder’s option, OSMF agrees to >> attribute You or the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] UK mapping authority switches to Open Government Licence (was: CTs and the 1 April deadline)

2011-01-06 Thread John Smith
On 7 January 2011 05:25, Mike Collinson wrote: > Nope. Clause 4 survives any license changes in the future, it is nothing to > do with the end user license: > > 4. At Your or the copyright owner’s holder’s option, OSMF agrees to > attribute You or the copyright owner holder. A mechanism will be pr

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] UK mapping authority switches to Open Government Licence (was: CTs and the 1 April deadline)

2011-01-06 Thread Mike Collinson
Nope. Clause 4 survives any license changes in the future, it is nothing to do with the end user license: 4. At Your or the copyright owner’s holder’s option, OSMF agrees to attribute You or the copyright owner holder. A mechanism will be provided, currently a web page

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] UK mapping authority switches to Open Government Licence (was: CTs and the 1 April deadline)

2011-01-06 Thread Mike Collinson
At 03:32 PM 6/01/2011, John Smith wrote: >On 7 January 2011 00:45, Mike Collinson wrote: >> Clause 4 of the new CTs may cover us completely, [it was designed for >> governmental organisations] and I have updated > >IMHO, section 4 is useless unless there is some kind of clause stating >what will h