2009/12/11 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
I see no evidence that that's the case. I don't think attempting to impose
a contractual agreement on others without their consent is going to work,
and I think there will be significant negative side-effects to such immoral
behavior.
I don't think immoral
This might sound like a crazy idea, but can't we just ask businesses
nicely about giving us their added data back?
It has already got us this far. You'd be surprised how far a little
mutual trust can get you.
___
talk mailing list
2009/12/11 Paul Wagener osm-t...@paulwagener.nl:
This might sound like a crazy idea, but can't we just ask businesses
nicely about giving us their added data back?
It has already got us this far. You'd be surprised how far a little
mutual trust can get you.
Isn't that in essence what licenses
Saying This would be a disaster is a bit hyperbolic. Sure, people
who hate OSMapping and just want to use bulk imports will be very,
very disappointed, and possibly even a bit upset that they actually
have to go out into the real world and make maps. ;-)
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 8:54 AM, John
John Smith wrote:
2009/12/11 Paul Wagener osm-t...@paulwagener.nl:
This might sound like a crazy idea, but can't we just ask businesses
nicely about giving us their added data back?
It has already got us this far. You'd be surprised how far a little
mutual trust can get you.
Isn't that in
Op 11 dec 2009, om 10:11 heeft John Smith het volgende geschreven:
2009/12/11 Paul Wagener osm-t...@paulwagener.nl:
This might sound like a crazy idea, but can't we just ask businesses
nicely about giving us their added data back?
It has already got us this far. You'd be surprised how far a
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 3:54 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/12/11 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
Plus I think OSM is going to lose a huge chunk of the database over this.
This would be a disaster, but some have already mentioned having a
read only database with non-ODBL data
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 12:12 PM, Anthony o...@inbox.org wrote:
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 3:54 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/12/11 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
Plus I think OSM is going to lose a huge chunk of the database over this.
This would be a disaster, but some have
On 11/12/2009, at 8:02 PM, Elizabeth Dodd wrote:
so we don't need imported data?
In most cases we don't need imported data, but it can be useful. For example
rather than painstakingly crafting the entire coastline of Australia from a few
GPS traces and a lot of imagery (much is relatively
2009/12/11 Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net:
so we don't need imported data?
-- Forwarded Message --
Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] Why PD is not better for business
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2009
From: paul youlten paul.youl...@gmail.com
To: Liz ed...@billiau.net
Liz,
The coastline
Where does this Business Bad:OSM good binary come from? (I suspect
the Germans ;-))
I don't understand how a business using OSM data for free and without
thinking of the children (AKA giving back to the community) is
bad for the project - every time we get ripped off we get a bigger
audience,
Hi,
paul youlten wrote:
I don't understand how a business using OSM data for free and without
thinking of the children (AKA giving back to the community) is
bad for the project - every time we get ripped off we get a bigger
audience, the more people that use the data the more more
The Orange Telecom/Wikimedia Foundation business model is one that
might work for OSM too.
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Press_releases/Orange_and_Wikimedia_announce_partnership_April_2009
Orange pay the Wikimedia Foundation a significant amount of money each
year - not for permission to
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 4:03 AM, paul youlten paul.youl...@gmail.comwrote:
Where does this Business Bad:OSM good binary come from? (I suspect
the Germans ;-))
No idea. Like I said, as a self-employed person, I find the distinction
incredibly confusing :). Business is great. It's what
2009/12/11 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
It's not. However, if we could convince businesses to give back to the
community, it'd be better.
If you feel that way, the ODBL would in principal be the better option
to ensure it happens with a stick just to make sure.
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 6:14 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote:
2009/12/11 Anthony o...@inbox.org:
It's not. However, if we could convince businesses to give back to the
community, it'd be better.
If you feel that way, the ODBL would in principal be the better option
to
On 12/9/09, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Are those in favour of PD really arguing that convenience for businesses is
the main benefit? I would have thought the main benefits would be for
individuals, and to avoid future licensing issues. Once data is licensed PD,
you really don't
Hi,
Anthony wrote:
Or we can just come right out and name names. Google has built a
business around mixing public domain data with its own proprietary
improvements. Cloudmade has build a business around provid[ing]
professional services around open mapdata. If everyone who improves
On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Frederik Ramm wrote:
It's a difficult situation being OSMF chairman, LWG leader, and
CloudMade founder at the same time. (I did campaign for no commercial
interests to be represented in the OSMF board in the election run-up
but, as always, nobody listened...)
Conflict of
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 2:51 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
If Steve were to say let's go PD, everone would howl: You're only doing
this so that CloudMade can rip us off!
If Steve says let's go ODbL, he is accused of only doing this because it
keeps CloudMade in business by
Hi,
I would like to counter another often-repeated misconception about
PD (or CC0, or BSD) licenses, namely that these licenses are better for
business because they allow businesses to do what they want.
The matter arose in the follwoing exchange here on talk:
As I've said many times
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
Hi,
I would like to counter another often-repeated misconception about
PD (or CC0, or BSD) licenses, namely that these licenses are better for
business because they allow businesses to do what they want.
The matter
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote:
This doesn't necessarily mean that share-alike is *good* for business,
but I believe that the difficulties that share-alike brings are prone to
hit a law-abiding hobbyist individual harder than a business giant with
a
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 10:07 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote:
Are those in favour of PD really arguing that convenience for businesses is
the main benefit? I would have thought the main benefits would be for
individuals, and to avoid future licensing issues.
I don't know. This
Hi,
Steve Bennett wrote:
Are those in favour of PD really arguing that convenience for businesses
is the main benefit?
No, but those against PD are sometimes accusing those in favour of PD
that they had some sinister business motive; or in this special case,
there's a business guy who says
25 matches
Mail list logo
