. Science Commons ain't the voice of
CC for data, and never was, and it's our collective fault in both parts
of the organization that we allowed that to happen (as Mike Linksvayer
pointed out in a post earlier this year at
http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/26283).
Back to lurking.
jtw
--
John
weren't very well
integrated with CC at that point either.
When I was in a previous job, I heard an aphorism that stuck with me.
Never assume malice when you can assume conference calls. That about
sums it up.
jtw
--
John Wilbanks
VP for Science
Creative Commons
web: http
On 9 Jun 2009, at 06:27, John Wilbanks wrote:
Puneet Kishor, who is a Science Commons Fellow looking at geospatial
data and climate change, will be attending and hoisting the facts
can't
be copyrighted flag.
Er, sounds like a red herring to me since they can have database
rights
Puneet Kishor, who is a Science Commons Fellow looking at geospatial
data and climate change, will be attending and hoisting the facts can't
be copyrighted flag.
jtw
legal-talk-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2009 10:06:00 +0200
From: Frederik Ramm
Steve wrote:
John I would assert that you're more worried about perceived
competition for your licenses
JTW says:
If this were the case, we'd have taken in the ODbL, or we'd have written
something like it. With CC's position in the licensing space it'd have
been quickly adopted - people
Merging a few threads here again...
Just to say that although I hold different positions than the ODC and
OKF on this issue, the ODC project has always been of the highest legal
and ethical standards, and the OKF folks as well. Jordan has run the ODC
as a labor of love for years and deserves a
(although I find the idea that freedom can only come from the
barrel of a license deeply depressing).
That's CC Zero out of the running then.
Actually no. This is a slightly wonky lawyer debate about semantics, but
we think tools like CC0 should be called *waivers* and not *licenses*.
the individual person working in the turk contest infringe - 5
facts, 10 facts, 100 facts? And who would you sue in the event you
wanted to take it to court?
jtw
--
John Wilbanks
VP for Science, Creative Commons
http
merging several threads here
I am not speaking for CC the organization here - there have been no
conversations to my knowledge about doing a compatibility check between
ODbL and CC licensing. But, I would remind everyone that the current
official CC policy on CC licenses and databases -
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 discussions with Joseph
I got a question from the list, did some research, and herein present
the answers. That's it - as Steve noted early in this, IANAL, and
arguments about the law between non lawyers can be as absurd as
arguments about geospatial nodes between lawyers...
I suggest you sit down with some lawyers
If anyone will be at GSDI in Trinidad this week, drop me a note if you'd
like to meet in person. I'm speaking at the plenary session on Wednesday.
I will likely refer to this debate in my comments but only in a general
sense (i.e. I won't name anyone, just outline the contours of the
PDDL/ODL
in a non-governed domain.
If the copyright law attaches and the data is PD, I can extract it and
your contract doesn't matter.
You pays your money and you takes your choice.
jtw
Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
El Miércoles, 20 de Febrero de 2008, John Wilbanks escribió:
*Maps* may indeed
13 matches
Mail list logo
