Hi,
On 22.10.2012 22:12, Alex Barth wrote:
I do hope to come to an agreement within OSM along the lines you just
hashed out, Frederik (while not quite advocating for it):
This really ought to be discussed on legal-talk where there are many
people with a year-long involvement into the finer de
Thanks for kicking over to legal list. Responses inline.
On Oct 22, 2012, at 6:34 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 22.10.2012 22:12, Alex Barth wrote:
>> I do hope to come to an agreement within OSM along the lines you just
>> hashed out, Frederik (while not quite advocating for it):
>
>
> From: Alex Barth [mailto:a...@mapbox.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2012 4:25 PM
> To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
> Cc: talk...@openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Talk-us] press from SOTM US
>
> Fair point. Still - I would ask what is the purpo
Hi,
On 10/23/12 01:24, Alex Barth wrote:
Say we clarified that geocoding a dataset with an OSM powered
geocoder (e. g. Nominatim) does not extend the ODbL license to such a
dataset. This clarification would not apply to the dataset that
actually powered the geo coder. So if I went and gathered i
Hi Frederik,
On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 2:44 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 10/23/12 01:24, Alex Barth wrote:
>>
>
> Another question that we could ask to enlighten us is: What do commercial
> geocoding providers usually allow you to do once you have paid them? When
> you geocode a dataset
Hi,
On 23 October 2012 11:44, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> ...
> During the license change discussion, my position was often this: Instead of
> trying to codify everything in watertight legalese, let's just make the data
> PD and write a human-readable "moral contract" that lists things we *expect*
> u
2012/10/24 andrzej zaborowski :
> As has been noted in the Public Domain subset thread, the contributors
> can make license statement that they like, but the OSMF can still
> enforce the database rights. So a statement by the contributors (e.g.
> on OSM wiki) that is not confirmed by the OSMF is n
On Oct 23, 2012, at 5:44 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10/23/12 01:24, Alex Barth wrote:
>> Say we clarified that geocoding a dataset with an OSM powered
>> geocoder (e. g. Nominatim) does not extend the ODbL license to such a
>> dataset. This clarification would not apply to the datase
On Oct 23, 2012, at 10:37 PM, andrzej zaborowski wrote:
>
> As has been noted in the Public Domain subset thread, the contributors
> can make license statement that they like, but the OSMF can still
> enforce the database rights. So a statement by the contributors (e.g.
> on OSM wiki) that is n
> From: andrzej zaborowski [mailto:balr...@gmail.com]
> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Talk-us] press from SOTM US
>
>
> A related question is whether any agreement like that can be made within
> the Contributor Terms. With the thread about the Public Domain OSM
> subset w
I personally can't see enough wiggle room both in the ODbL and the CTs
to make any dataset generated by geocoding and/or reverse geocoding
anything else than a derivative database. It is just the ODbL working as
intended. We went through a lot of effort to get from a broken to a
functional licence
I'd hate to see us give up here, there is too much at stake. The open questions
around geocoding are doing OSM a disservice just as CC-BY-SA did. This is from
a commercial community member's perspective just as an individual's, assuming
we all want a better open map. Opening OSM to geocoding wo
nything significantly geocoded using GMaps is property of Google.
-Mikel
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>
> From: Alex Barth
>To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
>Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 11:06 AM
>Subject: Re:
Hi,
On 25.10.2012 17:30, Mikel Maron wrote:
I don't see the issue with companies complying with like-for-like. There
is some logistical burden, but that could be offloaded by geocoding
services.
+1 - I think we're all (including LWG) still waiting for concrete use
case where somebody says: Th
+1 for examples. I'm working on pulling some together.
The like for like principle overlooks that data submitted to geocoders can be
sensitive for privacy or IP reasons. Think of geocoding patient data, client
data, suppliers data, members data in a scenario where a geocoder is only used
for a
arth
>To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
>Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 2:43 PM
>Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Talk-us] press from SOTM US
>
>+1 for examples. I'm working on pulling some together.
>
>The like for like principle overlooks that data submitted
On Oct 25, 2012, at 2:43 PM, Alex Barth wrote:
> +1 for examples. I'm working on pulling some together.
>
> The like for like principle overlooks that data submitted to geocoders can be
> sensitive for privacy or IP reasons. Think of geocoding patient data, client
> data, suppliers data, memb
835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
> From: Alex Barth
> To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 2:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Talk-us] press from SOTM US
>
> +1 for examples. I'm working on pulling some together.
>
> The l
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Alex Barth wrote:
>
> And this is where SA gets really hairy. It's entirely possible and actually
> quite common that part of a database that contains private data is public. E.
> g. public facing web sites that are powered from a Salesforce DB through a
> priva
19 matches
Mail list logo
