Well then that would mean we couldnt use any goverment licensed data as it would be an "interpretation" of a license and not made law in a house of commons/other law making place, which is unreasonable to expect. If lawyers are consulted to judge compatibility with the license they chose to release their data under what is the issue here?
On Jan 21, 2017 7:38 PM, "Paul Norman" <penor...@mac.com> wrote: > On 1/21/2017 4:34 PM, john whelan wrote: > >> What you have is an interpretation of the Federal Government license. >> From my background in the civil service my understanding is for a statement >> it would have to be over a minister's signature or by act of parliament. >> No one else has the authority unless it is delegated. >> > > If that's true and we can't rely on a statement from a government employee > to interpret their license, then we can no longer use OGL-CA data. > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca >
_______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
