On 03/12/2009, at 6:12 AM, Mike Collinson wrote:
We have now fully updated the OSM Contributors agreement section of the
main proposal. I hope that meets concerns about clarity of the change-over
process.
http://www.osmfoundation.org/images/3/3c/License_Proposal.pdf
A while ago on the
James Livingston doc...@... writes:
The reason (well, my version) for a share-alike licence is that people who use
OSM data have to release theirs, we can merge that in, and everyone benefits
from the extra data going around. ODbL help that because (I'm serious hoping)
that we could combine two
On 03/12/2009, at 10:19 PM, Mike Collinson wrote:
- Whether friendly or unfriendly, they never have any obligation to merge in
their data improvements into our database.
- However, you or I can.
Does that make sense?
I completely agree that they don't have to do anything towards merging
On 03/12/2009, at 10:19 PM, Ed Avis wrote:
That was my interpretation too. It appears to me that if some well-meaning
body released a set of data under the ODbL (which presumably we recommend as
an appropriate licence for geodata) then the OSM project would not be able to
use it. In other
4 matches
Mail list logo
