[talk-au] QTOPO online maps
jono at jonorossi.com
Mon Sep 16 10:37:36 UTC 2019
Thanks for jumping in Simon. Saves me digging through heaps of old threads.
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 6:53 PM Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:
> Why doesn't anybody else (outside of OSM) have an issue with the terms
> that we are asking to be waived? Because they simply ignore them.
> I have yet to see any data project proprietary, closed or open that
> actually conveys this correctly to their users (CC BY 4.0 IMHO actually
> rules out using so licensed data in closed projects). Given that the
> department in question and the other distributors of data on CC BY terms
> must be aware that the relevant terms are as a rule ignored, you would
> think that giving a positive answer to an organisation that is so polite to
> ask before using the data would just be a formality, but it seems not.
I now remember reading your comments on this in the past, and remember why
I also put DNRM in the too hard basket and just went back to mapping with
the resources we've got.
> It should really be clear from the blog post, but just to clarify: the
> interpretation of the CC BY licences that we based our guidance on is CCs
> reading of the licence and the result of discussion with CC, not something
> that the LWG invented.
I knew there was consultation but thanks for explicitly mentioning they
were completely involved during writing it. It is frustrating even
something like a CC license needs to be "interpreted" because it can be
read multiple ways.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-au