Edward, please use this BBB link: https://osmvideo.cloud68.co/user/gui-ztm-dqh
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 11:23 AM Mateusz Konieczny via legal-talk
wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Dec 10, 2020, 18:32 by bainton@gmail.com:
>
> though can't see how to set up Push to Talk
>
> big blue cog => audio input tab
First, let me say that I do know Frederik personally, I have had
pleasant dinners with him and hope to do so again post-pandemic. He
has apologised for his poor choice of words, and I accept his apology.
The volume of attacks and hostile tone against Celine in reaction to
the document she shared
Hi Edward,
OSMF and its working groups have traditionally used the HOT server.
Mumble is not a Web application.
However, we are looking at moving to BBB. A BBB link for this meeting
has not been circulated yet, so please use Mumble for the time being.
Best,
Kathleen
On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 9:36
> Many females do not map using their own name but will use a male sounding
> name to avoid problems.
John, are you seriously citing this as evidence that there is not
pervasive misogyny in the OSM community?
___
talk mailing list
Koppenhoefer
wrote:
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 27. Oct 2020, at 22:15, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk <
> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> >
> > Again, not conducting a comprehensive survey here, but if 95% of the
> polygons match OSM polygons, then even
Tom,
I think the description is rather unclear as to what the polygons are made
of. Lars-Daniel's original description made it down like they were OSM
polygons combined with each other, or otherwise simplified of details. A
quick glance at the website seemed to confirm this.
OTOH, his second email
Hi Lars-Daniel,
Even assuming the polygons are from a Derivative Database, I don't see a
reason for the data to be released under
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Trivial_Transformations_-_Guideline
Why would the polygons, which appear to be simply algorithmically
> 1. As far as I can tell from the copyright statement and use cases
> this is a produced work and SIL International, Map Maker, Ltd. And
> worldgeodatasets.com will retain their copyright for their parts of the
> produced work(overall map design, language polygons, admin boundaries and
>
Given that this is a US county agency, I take it they view the data as
public domain. That's a pretty common view for government entities in the
US.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020, 1:14 PM Mateusz Konieczny
wrote:
> But license is still needed, right?
>
> Or is it OK to interpret "Agency has no
Yes, it's fine. That is simply a disclaimer, not a limitation on use.
On Fri, Oct 9, 2020 at 11:14 AM wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have been in contact with the Syracuse-Onondaga County Planning
> Agency (SOCPA), an Onondaga County NY agency, about the licensing of a
> building footprint layer they
Where I am, there is wide variety in what days/hours such sites are
available, whether they are free or have a cost, whether you need an
appointment, and how temporary they are. Some are only around for a few
weeks, and I would expect them to last maximum 1 yr. Further, the use is
very limited
wrote:
> Thanks: I thought maybe 'others can use your content' meant we could.
>
> I'll keep hunting, but no CC photos of that patch of water that I've found
> so far.
>
> Any problem with linking to it only, in the meantime?
>
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2020 at 17:53, Kathleen Lu
No, that's just standard language that says Australia247.info can use the
photo, it says nothing about what OSM wiki or anyone can do. You would need
to get permission from the user. I suggest looking for a CC licensed photo.
On Mon, Sep 28, 2020 at 11:45 PM Edward Bainton
wrote:
> Hi legal
On Thu, Sep 24, 2020 at 3:30 AM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> Am Do., 24. Sept. 2020 um 12:05 Uhr schrieb Tom Hughes :
>
>> On 24/09/2020 10:18, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>>
>> > it contains changesets, notes, etc. but not diary posts or changeset
>> > comments (correct me if I’m wrong).
>>
> What I meant by legal assessment is that I would like to know what OSMF's
> layers
> think of this. I would assume that the OSMF has some sort of legal
> department,
> like the people who have drafted some of the fundamental legal documents
> (like
> Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, Contributor
>
>
> why not remove “geo-database of the”? If someone added the geo-database,
> maybe they wanted to exclude other databases or parts of the project? Are
> there terms for diary posts? Are diary posts distributed under the ODbL?
>
> Well, updating the Contributor Terms would be an enormous
GITNE,
I don't know what distinction you are drawing between opinion and legal
assessment. I cannot give you legal advice as I am not your lawyer, but my
legal opinion, based on the terms of the Contributor Agreement, is that
changeset comments are part of OSM's geo-database. Note that the terms
Hi GITNE,
Can you also specify what you think the problem is? I get the feeling that
you have an objection to changeset comments being posted in Slack. I'm
assuming such comments appear in the OSMUS slack group which is popular
with mappers. Why do you think this is a bad thing?
(To be clear, I
sent from a phone
>
> On 11. Sep 2020, at 20:46, Kathleen Lu wrote:
>
> If you put the attribution in Polish for a map meant for display in
> Poland, and then later the map is moved to London (say, to a museum),
> that's also fine because attribution was reasonable given the contex
"Reasonable" means that if you put the attribution in a language that most
people would expect, then it's fine, including at an airport in Poland. If
you put the attribution in Polish for a map meant for display in Poland,
and then later the map is moved to London (say, to a museum), that's also
[0] https://www.alltrails.com/ (in the search box enter the name of a
trail, park, or city to see their map.)
> It looks like AllTrails now correctly attributes OpenStreetMap. Those of
> you more familiar with the licensing might want to chime in and let me know
> if simply stating "(c)
ost of the digital data and its royalties". This
applies only to digital maps (scanned/vector) purchased from NAMRIA.
If it is not the data itself but rather derived from it, then there are no
restrictions.
-Kathleen
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 10:57 AM Kathleen Lu via legal-talk
A few thoughts:
I'd want to talk to a Philippine lawyer, because frankly, these two
sentences seem to contradict each other:
*No copyright shall subsist in any work of the Government of the
Philippines. However, prior approval of the government agency or office
wherein the work is created shall
At least in English,
"not reuse the Information in a way that suggests that it is official or
that Licensor approves your use of the Information;
take all reasonable steps to ensure that the uses permitted above do not
mislead others and that the Information itself is not misrepresented."
reads as
My personal take (not official guidance):
Question 1:
If I store calculated results based on OSM data in a database table
(without the actual OSM data itself), such as the number of specific
POIs, travel times, travel distances and so on - the database is then a
collective database, a derivative
On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 10:14 AM Alexandre Oliveira
wrote:
> > Mapbox also has a whitelabling option for customers to remove the logo
> from Mapbox tiles. But again, we're talking about the tile service. It
> would be quite reasonable for OSM to add a logo to the OSM tiles and make
> keeping
ieb Kathleen Lu <
> kathleen...@mapbox.com>:
>
>> I absolutely agree that looking at industry standard seems a good
>> indication of what is reasonable.
>> ...After researching this question, I found no commercial data provider
>> that required data attribution as pr
standard would suggest a *much* less strict interpretation of what is
"reasonable" under the ODbL.
-Kathleen
On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 5:28 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 28. Apr 2020, at 23:34, Kathleen Lu via talk
> wrote:
>
> The F
> the header of the code, that's the place where the attribution is expected.
>
> roughly equivalent to some corner in the displayed map, that's what the
> license says, right?
>
I do not think these two things are at all equivalent. OSM is a database,
so the equivalent attribution notice to the
I find this view quite surprising coming from a software engineer.
I know no major open source license that requires attribution *in the UI
that the user sees without clicking on anything*.
Every example of open source license attribution I have seen is after
several clicks, e.g.
My local University is the same way. Students and faculty automatically
get access, but community and alumni can get access by paying fees.
Is access=members an option?
It implies that you have to become a member according to some criteria, but
that membership is possible for a large swath of
Per the contributor agreement, the copyright remains with the contributors
(to the extent their individual contributions were copyrightable), to
license their rights to OSMF with a right to sublicense, but the database
rights belong to OSMF, because OSMF is the only entity that "collected" the
I would point you to
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Trivial_Transformations_-_Guideline
in particular the last example.
(Other official guidelines are at
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines - please
note that text at
I don't think you even need to get into
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Metadata_Layers_-_Guideline
or the substantial question.
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Horizontal_Map_Layers_-_Guideline
and
Right. Since the definition of "active contributor" includes "has
maintained a valid email address in their registration profile and responds
to a request to vote within 3 weeks", then people who do not vote do not
count as active.
A 2/3 majority voting in favor is not an easy threshold by any
I would not say this is true. Google maps has routing for walking, cycling,
and public transit, and their public transit information is probably more
complete than OSM's.
On Tue, Feb 25, 2020 at 11:25 AM Philip Barnes wrote:
> OSM includes walking and cycling infrastructure thus promoting and
>
Hi Robin,
Have you had a chance to review the Community Guidelines?
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines
In particular, I would think that the Horizontal Layers Guideline
("Examples of where you DO NOT need to share your non-OpenStreetMap data:
You use OpenStreetMap as
Hi Cj,
Easiest method would be for you to update
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors with this information.
(But please do note the import guidelines if you are thinking about
importing)
Best,
Kathleen
On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 5:26 AM Cj Malone wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I recently saw
Nuno I searched your attachment for the word "Snap" and it is nowhere to be
found.
On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 10:55 AM Nuno Caldeira
wrote:
> Hi Mateusz,
>
>
> They don't. Here's all my email exchange with them from October 2018, yes
> *2018*. it's more than enough with evidence and time to be
Dec 19, 2019 at 4:13 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 20. Dec 2019, at 00:16, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk <
> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
> >
> > This is not what the Substantial Guideline says. It says that fewer than
&
the guideline is about individual results, not about aggregations, for
> which the share alike provisions persist. From my interpretation this also
> implies that the attribution requirements persist for individual results,
> because otherwise it would not be clear that you cannot aggregate them.
>
> “substantial” does not mean it has to be a certain percentage of the whole
> db, you can see this from the substantial guideline, which has fixed limits
> that are not growing with the db. “substantial” means it’s more than one or
> two features (OpenStreetMap-Foundation has declared they see
it will contain a lot of postcode information from the original
> OpenStreetMap database, in adapted/translated form.
This doesn't seem correct to me. In the final set, each point will only
tell you yes/no whether it was in a particular postcode. That's not very
much info at all.
>
> To create
te:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 16. Dec 2019, at 22:09, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk <
> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
> That's what the guidelines are for!
> We can't cover every possible example because there are too many, but as I
> already said, I
> It is kind of unfortunate, because OSM as far as I am informed, wouldn't
> be interested in the specific dataset (of real estate prices) anyway.
>
> If it's not the type of data that OSM would be interested in, then why
doesn't it fall under the Collective Database Guideline?
the non-OSM data
That's what the guidelines are for!
We can't cover every possible example because there are too many, but as I
already said, I think your usecase is covered by the Geocoding Guideline.
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Geocoding_-_Guideline#The_Guideline
> Why
obviously prefer it if you added the data straight
> back to our database, but you do not have to, *as long as the public can
> easily get a copy of what you have done.* If you do not publicly
> distribute anything, then you do not have to share anything.
>
>
> Às 19:34 de 13/12/2019
Hi Christoph,
I think that there is a premise to your list that I do not quite agree
with. ODbL says:
3.1 Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, the Licensor
grants to You a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, terminable (but
only under Section 9) license to Use the Database for
nt body.*
>
>
>- *If a change is made to another free and open license, it is active
>contributors who decide yes or no, not the Foundation."*
>
>
>
> On Fri, 13 Dec 2019, 18:56 Frederik Ramm, wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 13.12.19 19:28, Kathleen
make a
Derivative Database. But Mattias has been very clear that is not what he's
doing. He just wants to display the subparts of a list of points he already
has on a different layer than the other subparts.
-Kathleen
On Fri, Dec 13, 2019 at 12:49 AM Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Kathleen,
>
> On 12
No, ODbL does not apply to any database that does not include OSM data.
There are two reasons.
First, this example is analogous to the FAQ here:
IMO (not yet stating the official opinion of the LWG since the LWG has not
had time convene and discuss), the predicted roads are not a Derivative
Database and Facebook can apply whatever license it wants to them
(including MIT).
It is not a case of “raw data dervived from aerial imagery, plus
For your usecase, Tom, perhaps Street-Complete would work for you if you
turned on all the building-related quests and turned off the other quests?
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.westnordost.streetcomplete=en_US
On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 11:33 AM Tom Russell
wrote:
> Am Mi., 6.
;database haven".
On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 10:37 AM Nuno Caldeira
wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 31 Oct 2019, 17:29 Kathleen Lu, wrote:
>
>> I'm curious as to the reason for your doubts, Nuno. Are you aware of case
>> law to the contrary?
>>
>
> I'm just surpri
I concur with KaiRo that screenshots are likely fair uses under US law (and
IAAL). They are small excerpts of the larger work (the map, or if you are
comparing to the database, even less is copied), the underlying work is
factual, the purpose is to provide an example and there is a good argument
Jurisdiction dependant, but here are two general concepts which I think are
relevant:
As the statute you quoted specifies, when copyright will belong to the
employer, it tends to depend on if the copyrightable work was made within
the scope of the employee's job. (If you're a software programmer,
Dave, I believe someone from the Facebook engineering team gave a
presentation at the recent SotMs on this:
https://2019.stateofthemap.org/sessions/3WQKAX/ &
https://2019.stateofthemap.us/program/sun/keepin-it-fresh-and-good-continuous-ingestion-of-osm-data-at-facebook.html
- the videos are up.
If
o the ODbL? I thought, ODbL is a
> generic databank license and not OSM specific.
>
>
> *Gesendet:* Montag, 14. Oktober 2019 um 19:57 Uhr
> *Von:* "Kathleen Lu via legal-talk"
> *An:* "Licensing and other legal discussions." <
> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org&g
; Geocoding results, so long as the aggregated collection of results does
> > not contain the whole or a substantial part of the OSM database. The
> > cloud-based Geocoder is, however, required to credit OpenStreetMap as
> > described in Section 4.3 of the ODbL.
>
> Ge
Recall that under the geocoding guidelines, it is not considered a
substantial extra if "only names, addresses, and/or latitude/longitude
information are included in the Geocoding Results," "the collection is not
a systematic attempt to aggregate all or substantially all Primary Features
of a
different data types...
On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 8:33 AM Lars-Daniel Weber
wrote:
> From: "Kathleen Lu via legal-talk"
> > Lars-Daniel already said that they are kept in separate columns and not
> > de-duplicated. There is no requirement that, in order to function as a
Cost is a relevant factor in database protection law, which is one of the
>> rights covered by the licence. First, a database is not protected unless
>> there has been "substantial investment" in its making.
>>
>
>
>
> "substantial investment" is not the same as monetary cost. The human time
>
> Extracting than 100 elements (non repeatable) from the databse accounts
> > for substantial.
>
The licence doesn't say this at all.
The ODbL defines substantial as:
“Substantial” – Means substantial in terms of quantity or quality or a
combination of both. The repeated and systematic
On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:16 AM Lars-Daniel Weber
wrote:
> From: "Kathleen Lu via legal-talk"
> > In my view, if you are keeping the two zip codes in different columns
> > and not removing duplicates, then essentially what you have is one
> > property tha
> Thus, assuming the shapefiles are essentially the equivalent of
> > simplified OSM border shapefiles, the shapefiles are covered by ODbL.
>
> Actually, it's like 40% OSM borders (hard borders, like roads, rivers,
> topography and administrative stuff) and 60% own borders, which don't
> appear
In my view, if you are keeping the two zip codes in different columns and
not removing duplicates, then essentially what you have is one property
that is "OSM ZIP" and one property that is "proprietary ZIP", and they are
two different properties that are not used to improve each other, so it is
a
In my mind, the tile license (CC-BY-SA) sits on top of the database
license, as the license to a produced work by the OSMF. So if what is
extracted is solely what was in the database, then the extraction is not
material that the tile license covered (the tile license cannot actually
change the
website auto-creating notes every time someone made a report
seems to support my theory.
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 12:14 PM Andy Townsend wrote:
> On 10/09/2019 17:40, Kathleen Lu via talk wrote:
> > Not that I've heard (I don't think that was ever the case), but 1000s
> > of notes
reported to them, so isn't it better for them to do all that work?
On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 11:44 PM Rihards wrote:
> On 10.09.19 03:12, Kathleen Lu via osmf-talk wrote:
> >
> https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes/DWG_2018_11_15#Facebook_update
>
> A good
called
> "Facebook maps"?
> Às 19:33 de 09/09/2019, Kathleen Lu escreveu:
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 12:10 PM Nuno Caldeira <
> nunocapelocalde...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Today i was check the maps on their website and noticed they have a
>> repor
On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 12:10 PM Nuno Caldeira
wrote:
> Today i was check the maps on their website and noticed they have a report
> button, which i thought would create a note on OSM. Oh i was wrong, no note
> on OSM, wonder where that report will go to.
>
??? Nuno, you do realize that DWG
Exempt Data" as including data to
which there are contractual limitations, so it appears that the city at
least made some effort to exclude third-party data from open data.
-Kathleen
On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 2:42 PM Kathleen Lu wrote:
> Hi Jan,
> Specifically, here's is an examp
Hi Jan,
Specifically, here's is an example of the Geographic Boundaries page that
indicates a CC-BY license:
http://data.houstontx.gov/group/geographic-boundaries
On the left side, at the bottom of the list of information. I would surmise
that this applies to all the geographic boundary datasets,
>
> > And to Martin's point, which would you consider more important, the
> overlay of rare information, the gas stations, or the basemap? Or is the
> overlay only more important than the basemap if the overlay comes from OSM?
>
>
> In a basemap/overlay data constellation, I would generally
https://janaodaparaabastecer.vost.pt/ is a very interesting example. On my
screen, the attribution clearly stretches longer than the width of the map.
Is your opinion then that they should attribute similar to your European
Commission example of "correct" attribution
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 3:27 PM Nuno Caldeira
wrote:
> Your complaint about LiveStream is that their attribution is completely
> missing, not that it's behind a click. I agree that it's missing and that
> it should be somewhere. It's not clear at all where they are getting their
> data (the
>
> b) LiveStream/Vimeo
>
>
> But following your "Where in CC-BY-SA's license does it say that
> attribution must be on top of an image or that no interaction is allowed",
> i have search all LiveStream website and there's no notice at all of OSM
> dat
this would probably
not cause financial harm to OSMF, but it would be very damaging to the
community.
On Fri, Aug 9, 2019 at 10:29 AM Christoph Hormann wrote:
> On Friday 09 August 2019, Kathleen Lu wrote:
> > You are right that we hope to avoid disputes by setting out
> > reason
; acknowledge the notice.
> Às 18:08 de 09/08/2019, Kathleen Lu escreveu:
>
>
> Guidelines by the licensor
>>
>> On legal advice, *what a Licensor says carries weight with users of our
>> data and, potentially, to a judge*. A court would make a final decision
>>
> Guidelines by the licensor
>
> On legal advice, *what a Licensor says carries weight with users of our
> data and, potentially, to a judge*. A court would make a final decision
> on the issue, however we hope these guidelines are helpful to *avoid *disputes
> arising in the first place and can
**Just a fyi that Dristie is a woman. She was at SotM last year and quite
nice to chat with.
On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 1:22 AM stevea wrote:
> As Michal/Mike suggested, I did reply to DrishT's diary page and DrishT
> quickly replied. He was conciliatory, saying "the team has been engaging
> in as
The produced work guideline goes down the slippery slope of trying to
> define a produced work though the intention of the creator. This was
> always a highly questionable approach. Not only because intention in
> general is hard to determine objectively but also because the ODbL does
> not
Agreed, my opinion is that generally a scenery generating program should be
considered a produced work.
It's possible the program reads from a derived database, depending on
whether map features were added, but that *database* could be made
available under ODbL. The program being GPL shouldn't
I don't think it's disingenuous at all for Facebook to use their own POIs
instead of OSM's. Wasn't the whole point of the Collective Databases
principle and the Collective Databases Guideline specifically to enable
this type of usage, so that those interested in OSM did not have to make an
"all or
I agree that human wisdom is critical to high quality, and AI isn't useful
if, at the end of the process, it doesn't produce quality output, but I
will challenge this statement: "you can have high quality without AI." I
don't think that's definitively true for a global map. It's very difficult
to
On the other hand, if the map of your area is completely blank, it looks
very daunting to a new mapper, who may be discouraged and abandon OSM
(either as too difficult to improve and as too poor quality to use).
The map is constantly changing because roads and other things on the map
are changing
The BBC article is missing a lot of context and details. The actual
Facebook post -
https://tech.fb.com/ai-is-supercharging-the-creation-of-maps-around-the-world/
- notes both the importance of human mappers and the local community's
on-the-ground contributions, and states "We became close
a) -
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=ddc63c34-a49f-4876-86d5-aaec83d65ed1
Best,
Kathleen
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 1:48 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 11. Jul 2019, at 20:23, Kathleen Lu wrote:
> >
> > "Substantial inve
r the obtaining,
verification or presentation of the contents." (Note that investment in
creating/setting the hours does not count.)
Best,
Kathleen
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019 at 12:34 PM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> > On 10. Jul 2019, at 18:35, Kat
For a single store I believe the answer is yes, since you're
> extracting un-copyrightable facts. But if there are a significant
> number of stores (as in this case), then the information becomes part
> of a database, which is by default protected by database rights (at
> least in the EU). You
Re the "misleading" license - I do not think that anyone at Tesco who wrote
that to cover the entire website was thinking of how it would specifically
apply to the hours of shops, as opposed to, for example, a phishing site
that attempted to emulate the Tesco site.
The different with the
am not so bothered if people then use them as part of some other piece
> of work which is commercial (such as a video with a narration, as you
> suggested) - as long as they are attributed.
>
>
> Would ODBL be the best license in this case? Or CC-by-SA?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
>
> --
> *From:* Martin Koppenhoefer
> *Sent:* 01 June 2019 08:25
> *To:* Nick Whitelegg
> *Cc:* Kathleen Lu; Milo van der Linden; OSM Talk
> *Subject:* Re: [OSM-talk] OpenTrailView 360 - StreetView-like application
> for hikers
>
>
>
>
> In general, it is impossible to find proper names in one language when you
> have solely name in other language. One needs more context to actually do
> this.
>
> To make the translator's job easier, I do a google or bing or wikidata
> or some machine translation, so that they can skip the
Looks neat, Nick!
I will say that given that OSM is under ODbL, which is not compatible with
CC-BY-SA (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/ODbL_Compatibility)
I would suggest that you consider using ODbL as the license instead of
CC-BY-SA.
Best,
Kathleen
On Fri, May 31, 2019 at 10:22
u
>
> 2019-05-14 8:08 GMT+09:00, Martin Koppenhoefer :
> >
> >
> > sent from a phone
> >
> >> On 14. May 2019, at 00:14, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> If by "Each wikidata people repeat this operation manu
Hi,
If by "Each wikidata people repeat this operation manually." you mean that
each individual Wikipedia editor makes their own decision about whether to
copy the lat/long, and it is not a coordinated or automated effort (not a
"systematic attempt to aggregate" per the Geocoding Guidelines), then
Google, yes. Google's lawyers, no ;)
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019, 4:07 AM Simon Poole wrote:
> Actually I think the more important question is: doesn't google have a
> better method to create a background map than screenshots? :-)
> (particularly noticeable due to the POI pins in the 2nd and third
>
less the mapper was a
disgruntled employee or some weird situation like that).
-Kathleen
On Mon, Apr 15, 2019 at 9:25 AM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> > On 15 Apr 2019, at 18:07, Kathleen Lu wrote:
> >
> > Hi Martin,
> > Yes, Google might already have a subsid
n Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 7:47 AM Martin Koppenhoefer
wrote:
>
>
> sent from a phone
>
> On 14. Apr 2019, at 10:48, Kathleen Lu wrote:
>
> For Berne counties, I think it technically depends on where the
> "infringement" takes place, whatever that would mean in thi
1 - 100 of 132 matches
Mail list logo
