[OSM-legal-talk] Fwd: [OSM-talk] copyright problem with datacopiedfrom a map
peter.miller at itoworld.com
Tue Aug 18 09:27:18 BST 2009
On 17 Aug 2009, at 19:13, SteveC wrote:
> On 17 Aug 2009, at 11:13, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
>> 2009/8/17 Peter Miller <peter.miller at itoworld.com>:
>>> You may wish to set up a Belgium equivalent for this page to act
>>> as a
>>> record of such reverts. As you can see we have been having some
>>> problems of our own.
>> actually I just fwded. the request as noone seems to care in talk
> I wouldn't say they don't care it's just it's a super busy list.
Should we have a talk-vandalism list then?
I am really conscious that the Lian123 'work' in Esssex/London/Kent/
Medway/Spain (Benidorm) and Germany that is listed on the 'GB-revert'
page has compromised some very good work by other people and much of
it is just sitting there waiting for tools good enough to dig it out
again or at least point out which features have been subsequently
edited without removing all the adjustments made by Liam123.
This is certainly not the list for the discussion, nor it talk-gb and
'talk' itself is far to busy to have much sustained concentration on
any one subject.
Andy mentions that copyright violation needs to go to the Data Working
Group. Why? Sure the foundation needs a log of action of copyright
violations, but I don't see why the requested reverts, or 'plastering
over the cracks' can't be put onto a public list by a concerned member
of the public and is then acted on by a suitably confident member of
the community. The foundation then steps back and only gets directly
involved in the bigger more problematic cases.
A talk vandalism list would also give much more visibility to the work
that the Data Working Group is doing and indeed be that record that
the foundation needs to prove that it responds to copyright violation.
> Yours &c.
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
More information about the legal-talk