[OSM-legal-talk] Usage of ODbL

80n 80n80n at gmail.com
Wed Sep 29 22:19:39 BST 2010


On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 9:34 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
> 80n wrote:
>
>> I doubt data from either of these sources would be compatible with OSM's
>> implementation of ODbL.
>>
>
> I don't think that it was Emilie's intent to point out that there is data
> "compatible" with OSM's implementation of ODbL (any PD data source would be
> - hardly news!). In fact I'm not even sure if these databases would contain
> anything of interest to OSM.
>
> Sorry, that was not some commentary on Emilie's intent, it was a reply to
the following question:

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com> wrote:
> Under the proposed contributor terms, would OSM be able to import or use
> any
> data from these ODbL-covered data releases?
>



> This is about the ODbL being adopted by others, thus showing that it is not
> just OSM who believe that it is good.
>

This is about ODbL being mis-adopted by others.  <rant>It's such a stupidly
complex piece of junk that I dou...</rant>



>
> The changes that the dataplace people made to 4.2 and 4.3 seem to have been
> intended to clarify how they'd like their attribution to be; I agree that
> this seems to be some kind of misunderstanding on their part, as they should
> just have given that as a separate copyright notice which would then have
> required everyone to keep it intact as per 4.2c, rather than including it
> verbatim in 4.2b.
>
> Bye
> Frederik
>
> --
> Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20100929/f7a9c946/attachment.html>


More information about the legal-talk mailing list