sent from a phone
> On 17. Dec 2019, at 01:35, Kathleen Lu wrote:
>
>
>>
>> To create an accurate postcode polygon from point features you will need a
>> lot of them, so probably already a handful of them would be considered
>> substantial.
>
> This logic seems backwards. Since it
sent from a phone
> On 17. Dec 2019, at 01:11, matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de wrote:
>
> I think, that's a moralistic point of view. I'll neither collect a
> substantial part
> of the whole OSM database, nor you could proof that there was big investment
> made to
> collect the data. Since
it will contain a lot of postcode information from the original
> OpenStreetMap database, in adapted/translated form.
This doesn't seem correct to me. In the final set, each point will only
tell you yes/no whether it was in a particular postcode. That's not very
much info at all.
>
> To create
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 17. Dezember 2019 um 01:00 Uhr
> Von: "Martin Koppenhoefer"
>
> it will contain a lot of postcode information from the original OpenStreetMap
> database,
> in adapted/translated form. Whether the amount is sufficient to be considered
> substantial
> will have to be
sent from a phone
> On 17. Dec 2019, at 00:04, Kathleen Lu wrote:
>
> But what that says is not just "create a new database" but one "that contains
> the whole or a substantial part of the original OSM database." His new
> database will contain very little if any of the original OSM
But what that says is not just "create a new database" but one "that
contains the whole or a substantial part of the original OSM database." His
new database will contain very little if any of the original OSM database.
On Mon, Dec 16, 2019 at 2:48 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> sent from
sent from a phone
>> On 16. Dec 2019, at 22:09, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk
>> wrote:
> That's what the guidelines are for!
> We can't cover every possible example because there are too many, but as I
> already said, I think your usecase is covered by the Geocoding Guideline.
>
Am 16.12.2019 um 17:22 schrieb Nuno Caldeira:
> it's a derivated, therefore share alike. I'm glad they trusted OSM data.
I'm not sure what you are referring to here.
Yes the distances are a Produced Work which, if publicly used, implies
that if a Derivative Database was used to produce the
> It is kind of unfortunate, because OSM as far as I am informed, wouldn't
> be interested in the specific dataset (of real estate prices) anyway.
>
> If it's not the type of data that OSM would be interested in, then why
doesn't it fall under the Collective Database Guideline?
the non-OSM data
That's what the guidelines are for!
We can't cover every possible example because there are too many, but as I
already said, I think your usecase is covered by the Geocoding Guideline.
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Geocoding_-_Guideline#The_Guideline
> Why
> Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2019 um 17:03 Uhr
> Von: "Tom Lee via legal-talk"
>
> This is an admirable impulse, but it is worth emphasizing that those of
> us who participate on OSM listservs are a small and unrepresentative
> fraction of the project's 5.9 million registered users. Lists
> Von: "Nuno Caldeira"
> it's a derivated, therefore share alike. I'm glad they trusted OSM data.
So the distance calculations are derivated, of course.
But what about their points of interests? They've interacted with the roads.
___
legal-talk
it's a derivated, therefore share alike. I'm glad they trusted OSM data.
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019, 15:25 , wrote:
> Dear IANALs,
>
> I'm sorry to ask an additional question.
>
> A while ago, I've listened to a talk about navigation of pupils from their
> home to the school - it was used to decide
> I was aware of this and just wanted to get a consensus by the data
creators: the users.
This is an admirable impulse, but it is worth emphasizing that those of us
who participate on OSM listservs are a small and unrepresentative fraction
of the project's 5.9 million registered users. Lists like
Am Mo., 16. Dez. 2019 um 16:03 Uhr schrieb <
matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de>:
> Now, I neither can use your data, nor add my dataset to yours. A
> lose-lose-situation :-(
>
the problem is that "your dataset" is not yours, otherwise you could add
it, and you could also decide whether to use
On Monday 16 December 2019, matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de wrote:
> >
> > The usual view is that share-alike provisions do not make something
> > non-free or non-open because they are meant to protect and extend
> > the freedom and only constrain users of truly non-free data. But
> > anyone
On Monday, December 16, 2019, 07:35:08 AM EST, Simon Poole
wrote:
> Just to be clear: you asked a question on an unmoderated, publicly accessible
>mailing list on which everybody can voice their opinions however unfounded
>they are or not, and now you are unhappy with that you got a cacophony
Dear IANALs,
I'm sorry to ask an additional question.
A while ago, I've listened to a talk about navigation of pupils from their home
to the school - it was used to decide whether the pupil gets a free bus ticket
or not.
The distance calculation was done by a land registry office, which
Christoph.
> Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2019 um 12:03 Uhr
> Von: "Christoph Hormann"
>
> This is definitely a better approach than trying to find loopholes in
> the license with brute force and wishful thinking. Even if that is
> possible and you can present an interpretation of the wording
Simon,
> Gesendet: Montag, 16. Dezember 2019 um 13:33 Uhr
> Von: "Simon Poole"
>
> Just to be clear: you asked a question on an unmoderated, publicly
> accessible mailing list on which everybody can voice their opinions
> however unfounded they are or not, and now you are unhappy with that you
>
I don't care about the money it costs, I even would pay for OpenStreetMap. I just wanted to use OSM, since the data quality is pretty high in the area I need it.
In a future license it would be better to allow attributions like "Data: (c) Non-Free, selected using (c) OpenStreetMap under
Just to be clear: you asked a question on an unmoderated, publicly
accessible mailing list on which everybody can voice their opinions
however unfounded they are or not, and now you are unhappy with that you
got a cacophony of conflicting opinions, which is exactly what you
should have expected.
On Monday 16 December 2019, matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de wrote:
>
> Okay, I'll canceld all plans to use OpenStreetMap for this task.
> I've contacted several commercial data providers and hope to get
> offers tomorrow.
In general (not necessarily specifically in your case - i don't know
that's unfair, it is free, you don't have to pay for it. it just has a
license, or else map companies would use our data
On Mon, 16 Dec 2019, 02:19 , wrote:
>
> I didn't expected OpenStreetMap to be such non-free and permissive :-(
>
___
legal-talk
Am Mo., 16. Dez. 2019 um 03:19 Uhr schrieb <
matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de>:
> Okay, I'll canceld all plans to use OpenStreetMap for this task.
> I've contacted several commercial data providers and hope to get offers
> tomorrow.
>
> I didn't expected OpenStreetMap to be such non-free and
25 matches
Mail list logo
