<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On 2 Mar 2009, at 07:38, Gustav Foseid wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 3:03 AM, Frederik Ramm <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:frederik@remote.org">frederik@remote.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Not so, it turns out; the "Produced Work" freedom allows us to combine<br> OSM data *only* with other data whose license does not prohibit the<br> addition of constraints, because ODbL mandates that we add the "reverse<br> engineering leads to ODbL licensing" rule.</blockquote></div><br><br>I do not read the ODbL this way. I read that only persons bound by the license/contract are prohibited from reverse engineering. Clarification here is needed.</blockquote><div><br></div>When we find an issue like this then lets document it on the wiki and move on to the next topic. We have identified at least two so far, 1) When is a 'DB and derived DB' and now 'what licensing applies to Produced Works and how does the 'no reverse engineering' clause work with PD images.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br><blockquote type="cite"><br> <br> - Gustav<br> _______________________________________________<br>legal-talk mailing list<br><a href="mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org">legal-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk<br></blockquote></div><br></body></html>