data, you
may distribute the result only under the same licence"); in the CC
"human-readable" terms; and the CC legal code.
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-CC-BY-SA-Non-separatable-combination-of-OSM-other-tp5982104p5990496.html
The
license doesn't even mention "data", and attribution is not enough.
>>>
>>> OSM applies the license to data - the license attribution it requests
>>> specifically mentions "Map data".
>>
>> Again, who wrote the license attribution request? Not me. In fact,
>> I'm not even sure wha
On 03/02/11 14:23, Anthony wrote:
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 5:23 AM, Jonathan Harley wrote:
On 03/02/11 04:21, Anthony wrote:
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Jonathan Harleywrote:
I think we may have differing interpretations of the intent of the
license.
Mine is that the license is supposed
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 12:00 PM, Peter Miller wrote:
> The strict view expressed above by Frederick and others would mean that it
> would be impossible to use osm mapping as a bacground for this crime data as
> in the chart, 'Violent crime in the USA' unless the overlaid data was also
> on an open
Hi,
On 02/02/11 18:00, Peter Miller wrote:
The strict view expressed above by Frederick and others would mean that
it would be impossible to use osm mapping as a bacground for this crime
data as in the chart, 'Violent crime in the USA' unless the overlaid
data was also on an open licence or the
2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-CC-BY-SA-Non-separatable-combination-of-OSM-other-tp5982104p5985604.html
Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-t...@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
I have been following the discussion but have been in meetings today so
haven't been able to contribute.
I agree we can discuss at lenght what 'separable' and 'unmodified' mean as
abstract concepts but, as usual with legal contracts, the words will be
interpreted in a particular context.
It is pr
On 02/02/11 16:15, Anthony wrote:
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jonathan Harley wrote:
I think Peter is right - as long as
the CC-BY[-SA] content is unmodified, it can be assembled with other things to
form a collective work. The CC-BY[-SA] licenses do not say that they still have
to be sepa
On 02/02/11 15:59, Jonathan Harley wrote:
By referring to a collective whole, it seems to me that the license is
asserting that such a thing can exist. I think Peter is right - as long
Oh I see, I didn't realise that's the wording of the licence.
That's an unfortunate turn of phrase then. :-)
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 10:59 AM, Jonathan Harley wrote:
> I think Peter is right - as long as
> the CC-BY[-SA] content is unmodified, it can be assembled with other things to
> form a collective work. The CC-BY[-SA] licenses do not say that they still
> have
> to be separate and independent after
On 02/02/11 13:21, Rob Myers wrote:
On 02/01/2011 06:17 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
Peter says that
I would consider the proposed resulting work to be 'two or more
distinct, separate and independent works selected and arranged into a
collective whole with the ccbysa content being used in an enti
11 matches
Mail list logo
