On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Simon Ward si...@bleah.co.uk wrote:
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 11:30:41AM -0500, Russ Nelson wrote:
Creative Commons license (by-sa). or under the ODbL. If you choose not to
give us your email address, or your email address stops working, you
waive all right to
On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 05:05:00AM +, Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
This needs a safeguard to allow for email addresses temporarily not
working. I’m not even sure this is the right thing to do anyway. It’s
far safer getting rid of a user’s data than it is assuming ownership of
it.
Some
On Sun, Mar 01, 2009 at 11:30:41AM -0500, Russ Nelson wrote:
Creative Commons license (by-sa). or under the ODbL. If you choose not to
give us your email address, or your email address stops working, you
waive all right to ownership of your edits.
This needs a safeguard to allow for email
On Mar 1, 2009, at 12:46 PM, Philipp Klaus Krause wrote:
Russ Nelson schrieb:
[...], or your email address
stops working, you waive all right to ownership of your edits.
Probably about as legally binding as posting a note on the site that
says By reading this you agree to sacrifice your
I see your point. Data potentially infringing if removed now could be
recreated now, making later bookkeeping easier.
On Mar 1, 2009, at 7:33 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Hi,
Russ Nelson wrote:
I don't see much value in removing the data now on the chance that
we might have
to remove it
I'm thinking that we should modify the agreement that people make when
they sign up. It should read something like this:
By creating an account, you agree that all work uploaded to
openstreetmap.org and all data created by use of any tools which
connect to openstreetmap.org is to be
Has the ODbL been finalized yet ? If not it will either need to read
something like ODbL version X or later.
I support you and I would like to go even further. Namely any license
that the OSMF chooses. But at least one of the OSMF members (Mikel?)
was opposed to it because it's so easy to get
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
Has the ODbL been finalized yet ? If not it will either need to read
something like ODbL version X or later.
The or later seems to be included in the text of ODBL S4.4 (unlike
GPL etc where its a per-project choice) with the
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
But at least one of the OSMF members (Mikel?)
was opposed to it because it's so easy to get OSMF membership (and as
a consequence a controlling majority on the board).
Did someone calculate how much it would cost to buy the
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
I support you and I would like to go even further. Namely any license
that the OSMF chooses. But at least one of the OSMF members (Mikel?)
was opposed to it because it's so easy to get OSMF membership (and as
a consequence a
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:06 PM, OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Nic Roets nro...@gmail.com wrote:
Has the ODbL been finalized yet ? If not it will either need to read
something like ODbL version X or later.
The or later seems to be included in the text
Russ Nelson schrieb:
[...], or your email address
stops working, you waive all right to ownership of your edits.
Probably about as legally binding as posting a note on the site that
says By reading this you agree to sacrifice your firstborn to the OSMF.
Philipp
12 matches
Mail list logo
