[Talk-GB] Dorset/Wilts county boundary wrong...is there adefinitive source?
80n80n at gmail.com
Wed Sep 8 16:13:59 BST 2010
On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Emilie Laffray <emilie.laffray at gmail.com>wrote:
> On 8 September 2010 15:08, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Kevin Peat <kevin at kevinpeat.com> wrote:
>>> On 8 September 2010 10:07, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2010 at 9:41 AM, Kevin Peat <kevin at kevinpeat.com> wrote:
>>>>> Until the issue of whether the OS datasets can be used under the new
>>>>> license/CT is resolved it seems a bit pointless doing anything like this
>>>>> whatever the merits might be.
>>>> The OS datasets are compatible with OSM as it stands at the moment.
>>>> Worrying about future incompatibilities that may or may not happen is not
>>>> helpful to the project.
>> I should qualify my sweeping statement about OS datasets being compatible
>> with OSM. They are if you are an old contributor. They are *not* if you
>> signed up after 12th May, because Ordnance Survey's license is incompatible
>> with the new Contributor Terms.
>> So if you are a new contributor, too bad.
> To the best of my knowledge, legal counsel has not yet stated so, as the
> LWG has approached legal counsel on that particular topic. So until we have
> something whether negative or positive, the point you are making is pretty
> much moot.
That doesn't give new contributors the right to contribute OS datasets to
OSM. It is accepted practice here to avoid infringing copyright and to be
cautious. On that basis new contributors are best advised not to use OS
datasets. When you have an opinion, positive or negative, from Wilson
Sonsini then new contributors can be advised accordingly.
Let's take this to legal@ if you have more to add.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-GB