[talk-au] ODbL data.gov.au permission granted
80n80n at gmail.com
Tue Sep 27 13:39:10 BST 2011
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Grant Slater
<openstreetmap at firefishy.com>wrote:
> On 27 September 2011 12:09, 80n <80n80n at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thank you, Andrew.
> > I wonder if Grant received a similar answer but interpreted it in a
> > different way. Grant?
> Hi 80n, yes the responses will be forthcoming. We are waiting on some
> further clarifications. LWG also now only meet fortnightly.
If you have "explicit special permission" why do you seek further
clarification? Was it not explicit enough?
Perhaps you'd be kind enough to publish the text of the permission you have
received. We can then see for ourselves.
> 80n, why the interest in Australian gov data licensing? Or maybe we'll
> never know. ;-)
I'm interested in all matters relating to OSM licensing. Particularly
statements that might encourage contributors to damage the provenance of OSM
by submitting content that infringes other people's rights.
As you know the value of OSM is that it is (largely) unencumbered by
contributions from sources that reserve copyright. While some people may
have lower standards than others, anything that increases the amount of
infringing material in OSM needs to be resisted.
Your unattributed statements are likely to be damaging unless you provide
the documentary evidence to back them up. At first you claim to have
"explicit special permission" but now you are back pedalling and seeking
clarification. It would have been much better, and would *still* be much
better, if you were to just publish what you received verbatim. Is there
some reason why you are unwilling or unable to do this?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-au