I'm happy with wikipedia PD as well.
The Sunburned Surveyor
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 4:28 AM, Joseph Gentle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm happy with that. Thankyou :)
>
> -J
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 7:11 PM, Kari Pihkala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I counted the votes for PD "license" so
Back to square 1. :]
Is public domain really this hard?
The Sunburned Surveyor
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Rob Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
>> Nothing is ever as simple as you hope. :]
>>
>> Joseph wrote: "
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
> Nothing is ever as simple as you hope. :]
>
> Joseph wrote: "I don't think its that big a deal - we could just say
> "if you edit a
> node, your edits are also under the same PD license as the node is
> currently under" or
I have no problem avoiding the moral rights quagmire. I think
simplicity is one of the reasons to move to PD in the first place.
I don't think it would be a problem to use the wikipedia public domain
license now, and then consider a future move to something like the CC
Zero.
I would strongly reco
Joseph Gentle wrote:
> Can we get a vague show of hands about what people think of this? I
> don't think its worth discussing for more than a day or so. If this
> issue is too contentious, we can let contributors decide with an
> option on their user page or something.
+1 wikipedia version
If yo
"Perhaps PD is not as simple as it seems at first sight."
True. But its got to be simpler than viral share-alike. :]
The Sunburned Surveyor
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 2:12 PM, 80n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Jordan S Hatcher
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> On p
Hi,
80n wrote:
> Perhaps PD is not as simple as it seems at first sight.
The thing that is simple about PD is what contributors want - they
simply want to make the data available to anyone, forever, without
restrictions of any kind, full stop. You will not find a single use case
where one PD a
On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 12:08 PM, Jordan S Hatcher <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On picking a PD dedication/licence:
>
> On 16 Oct 2008, at 20:08, Kari Pihkala wrote:
> > I created a wiki page for the public domain map, have a look at
> > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Public_Domain_Map .
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Peter Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> >What does OSM Foundation think about the PD repository? Would it make
> sense
> >to host both licences under the name OpenStreetMap or would it be
> >confusing? How much OSMF wants to be part of the PD version? After all
>
Hi,
Joseph Gentle wrote:
> I don't think it matters much where our mailing list is hosted. A
> google group would be fine
I for one will certainly not join a Google list, I don't know if I'm
just picky or if others feel the same - Google lists just provide an
incentive for ever more people to o
Hi,
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> I'm the person who started the "all my contributions are PD"
> thing on the Wiki
Seems I was wrong here, Wiki history lists RichardF as the inventor and
myself as a mere follower a few weeks later! Well then, I guess, PD is
not so great after all ;-)
Bye
Frederik
On Wed, Oct 15, 2008 at 4:45 PM, Joseph Gentle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think the idea that everything only touched by PD contributors is PD
> data is easily good enough. It would be a tough sell to say that
> because your road is next to my road, I have intellectual property
> rights over
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 1:44 AM, Frederik Ramm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My thinking as well, just needs careful consideration of viral
> effects, i.e. if you want to be totally safe then you can only ever
> collect data before it is assimilated into the OSM pool, and after
> that it is complete
spaetz wrote:
> check the wiki, there are a few people that have the "I release my
> data as PD template on their user pages". I would expect the biggest
> problem is that existing data is likely to be "tainted" by the OSM
> license if anybody not on that list ever modified it
significantly
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 8:19 PM, Sunburned Surveyor
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I suppose there is the Public Domain Dedication from the Creative
> Commons that we could use as well, although that will have to be
> discussed among the participants. Or the Open Data Commons Public
> Domain Dedicati
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 11:54:37AM -0700, Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
> I believe there is (at least a small) group that would also like to
> release there data into the public domain before it is contributed to
> OSM. Joseph and Kari have given their support to setting up a
check the wiki, there ar
The folks at Creative Commons and Science Commons would be happy to help
out in the creation of a public domain repository. My opinions on the
difficulties of using "copyleftish" licenses on data are well known and
I won't rehash them here :-)
jtw
I've had some recent discuss
I suppose there is the Public Domain Dedication from the Creative
Commons that we could use as well, although that will have to be
discussed among the participants. Or the Open Data Commons Public
Domain Dedication and License,
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/
http://www.opendatac
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, Oct 14, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
> I've had some recent discussions with Joseph Gentle and Kari Pihkala
> about the desire to maintain a "clean" repository of data collected
> for OSM that would be released in the public doma
I've had some recent discussions with Joseph Gentle and Kari Pihkala
about the desire to maintain a "clean" repository of data collected
for OSM that would be released in the public domain before being
imported into OSM. This would allow anyone to use the data without
having to worry about the OSM
20 matches
Mail list logo
