On 10/16/09, Erik Johansson wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 12:23 AM, Richard Fairhurst
> wrote:
>>
>> Erik Johansson wrote:
>>> Open Database License (ODbL)
>>> “Attribution and Share-Alike for Data/Databases”
>>
>> Yep. Exactly.
>>
>> CC-BY-SA, famously, allows you to combine different types o
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Gustav Foseid wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Matt Amos wrote:
>>
>> what are your thoughts?
>
> I have a hard time seeing how any of these usecases can be anything other
> than insubstantial extractions. The database directive (article 15) says
> that "An
On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Matt Amos wrote:
> what are your thoughts?
>
I have a hard time seeing how any of these usecases can be anything other
than insubstantial extractions. The database directive (article 15) says
that "Any contractual provision contrary to Articles 6 (1) and 8 shall b
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:55 PM, James Livingston wrote:
> On 06/10/2009, at 11:30 PM, Matt Amos wrote:
>> so far, all the responses seem to indicate that everyone thinks
>> linking to OSM data by ID is OK. what about Andy's idea, though? is it
>> OK to take a location, name and possibly an ID as w
On 06/10/2009, at 11:30 PM, Matt Amos wrote:
> so far, all the responses seem to indicate that everyone thinks
> linking to OSM data by ID is OK. what about Andy's idea, though? is it
> OK to take a location, name and possibly an ID as well to perform
> "fuzzy" linking?
>
> my view is that all the
> On 2 Oct 2009, at 18:06, Matt Amos wrote:
>
>> hi legals,
>>
>> i've come across a couple of interesting questions / use-cases for the
>> ODbL and wider discussion. it basically reduces to whether we want the
>> ODbL to have viral (GPL-like) behaviour, or whether it should be less
>> viral (LGPL-
6 matches
Mail list logo
