<div dir="ltr"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">Dear all,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">we are a start-up working
on a visit-planning tool and struggle whether our use of OSM triggers
share-alike and to which extent. I read the licence, user cases, legal facts, trivial transformation, and much more, but am still not fully confident were we stand with our tool. I apologize for the long email and the many questions, but it is crucial for us to understand the impacts of using OSM. We are trying to find the right balance between ODbL licence, customer rights and business data confidentiality. I would highly appreciate any input on the below points.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">Starting Assumptions:</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- We are more than happy to give credit to OSM and to share the data that fit the OSM purpose, as it is a great tool and we would like to contribute back by using it. </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- We would have legal issues if we were forced to share our customers' data in any way with anyone (even if they themselves publish something on-line through our tool). There is a very fine line, what counts as customer data and public data.<br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- OSM based tiles (unsure yet if we will use our own server or a third party service)</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- Nominatim for
geocoding</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- POIs - for the sake of the below questions, we assume the use of OSM POIs </span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- users share their visit plans globally through our tool</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- assume significant traffic on our tool - this is for the sake of potential "substantial" geocoding arguments</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">- there is a legal difference between the customer sharing publicly his data and us sharing his data (even if the data might legally after some time belong to us)</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">The questions we have, are around POIs and geocoding (coded addresses, expanded POIs and custom POIs) and them triggering a share-alike of our other customer data.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q1.) </b>if we just use the map tiles (CC-BY-SA) and display purely our OWN POI data on it, we do not trigger share alike for our own data.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">---------------------</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">If I understood correctly the distinction between tiles and the remaining data, it will be only ODbL beyond this point.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">I am unsure about the interpretation of ODbL specifically because of the ODbL v1.0 text under:</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">1.0) "Collective Database - [...]independent databases in themselves[...]"</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">4.4.b ) "... extraction or re-utilization of the whole or a substantial part of the contents into a new database is a derivative database" - (I know substantial is the keyword here..)</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">4.6.b ) "... containing ALL of the alterations made to the database [..], including ANY additional contents .."</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q2.) The user inputs point of his visit</b></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- as an address text that
is then </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- converted to
coordinates with Nominatim</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- and saved under a
visit number (primary key) in our DB.</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- And based on the location we show POIs in the area</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q2a)</b> If we save both,
coordinates and address, this becomes a <u>derivative database</u>, because we, in theory, with enough points, could re-engineer the whole OSM DB(Geocoding Guideline). So it must be shared (address, coordinates, visit primary key as well). ODbL 4.6.b and 1.0 "collective database" seems to imply that even the visit number must be shared, because the key is not independent by itself (it was generated because of the coordinates)?</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q2a1)</b> What if we then, based on the user location, save also the OSM POI IDs in the area under the same visit number (different DB)?</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">We assume that the derivative database continues to apply because of </span>ODbL 4.6.b "additional content".<span lang="EN-US"> We need to share this DB as well (basically all the information that is saved with this visit- because the starting points were based on OSM geocoding)</span><span lang="EN-US">? </span>I assume that it is not because we saved OSM POI ids, as that would be seen as trivial matching or under ODbL 1.0 "independent databases in themselves"?</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">Or does ODbL 1.0 "collective DB" apply to the whole "visit DB", because the visits just use the ids (trivial link) to link to the OSM POIs. The visit database can actually stand alone AND it doesn't matter that the subgroup of OSM POIs were found <u>based on the initial geocoding through Nominatim</u>?</p></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q2b - alternative to a)</b> </span>If we just save coordinates from the address (not the address itself), does it change anything? We now cannot rebuild the geocoding DB anymore, but the coordinates still come from Nominatim. Do we then still have a <u>derivative DB</u> because of ODbL 4.4b substantial clause (with time anyways) and need to share the list of coordinates and visit primary key (the primary key might be answered by Q2a)? In theory one could argue that if we pulled ALL coordinates, we pulled a substantial part of the contents (no matter that those are just numbers, so it really has no value at all to anyone, without additional info).</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt">.</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><b>Q2b1)</b> I assume there is no difference to Q2a1, independent of Q2b answer, as the POIs are still coming from OSM, so the answer will be equivalent to whatever it is above.</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><b>Q2c - alternative to a)</b> What is the situation, if the customer inputs an address and then has an option to confirm that the coordinates are correct? If he confirms without changes, we save only the address (NOT the coordinates from Nominatim). This should be collective DB, as we save no OSM data. (when we display we than call on Nominatim to give us the coordinates to display the address, but we never save the coordinates)?<br><br>But if the coordinates are wrong and we ask him to correct them and then save his input in our DB, we would need to share all our addresses and coordinates, as it is probably ODbL 1.0 "derivative database ... modification". Correct?<br><br></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px">So for not having all data falling under ODbL, would a separate DB of addresses and coordinates and corrected coordinates allow us to not share the rest of the visit (in case the visit is above answered as collaborative DB)?</blockquote></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><br><b>Q2d)</b> If the customer inputs address and coordinate on the map himself by clicking on the map. that would be pure collective DB (we save nothing from OSM). <br></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><br></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><b>Q3)</b> if we were to obscure the starting point for privacy security reasons and randomly add a few mmm to the coordinate, would we still need to share the underlying "real point" (might potentially be answered by Q2 answers if using Nominatim as a start is already a derivative DB)?</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q4-Q6.) expanded POIs</b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- we want to use our own category tagging for POIs, but to develop it, the original OSM POI tags will be used</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- the OSM POIs will be expanded for phone nr., website and proprietary information (by us or the user) and will in some cases be shared publicly</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q4) </b>when developing our own tagging, (linked to OSM POI IDs) is that a <u>derivative</u> because of ODbL 4.4.b (are all tags of POIs a substantial part of the OSM DB and we look at them prior developing our own) and 4.6b (any additional content must be shared)?</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q5a)</b> if we used OSM phone numbers and web links, and add to OSM POIs that don't have any, our numbers and links through our user input, this is a derivative DB and needs to be shared (ODbL 4.4b).</span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q5b</b></span><b>- alternative to a</b><b>)</b> if we didn't use any OSM phone or web links, but just ours, that would be collective</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><b>Q5b1)</b> the above is valid as long, as we have names of the POIs from a different source. If we just pulled the names from OSM and added our own phone numbers through our users and saved it somewhere else, would ODbL 4.4.b "substantial" pull (even without mixing it with phone nrs from OSM)?</p></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p></blockquote><b>Q7) custom POIs</b><div>- a customer adds some kind of a point that he feels is important (and again shares)</div><div><br></div><div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><b>Q7) </b>if someone adds a church in our DB and tags it as a church (even if he puts all address and coordinates information in manually), it falls under share alike, if we also show churches from OSM (horizontal layer guideline)</div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><b><br></b></div><div><br></div><div><br></div></blockquote><div><br><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q8) linking OWN POIs with OSM POIs</b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US">- for this assume we have our own POI database with names, coordinates</span></p></div></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b><br></b></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q8a) </b>if we just matched through link of names and close coordinates our POIs with OSM POIs (without correcting our coordinates by using the OSM data) and then showed OUR POIs with OSM addresses, it would be collective</span>. This is supported by ODbL 1.0 "collective DB - independent databases in themselves".</p></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q8b)</b> it becomes a derivative DB, if we chose to show our addresses where available and OSM addresses when we have nothing) - due to ODbL 4.4.b - "potential" substantial clause and "</span>horizontal layer guideline".</p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><b>Q8c)</b> In order to protect our customers data when they input new private points and POIs (of any category), we would have to make the</span> user first input the POI name and address, without us matching anything to OSM (or proposing the best match). And once he/she saves it we can have an algorithm run and see if there is a match in OSM, and ask the user, if that is the best match. </p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><br></p></div></div></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><b>Q8c1)</b> If we would propose a match on the fly, as the customer types, it might potentially again fall under ODbL 1.0 derivative database "based upon" and if too many users do it also 4.4.b "substantial".</p></div></div></blockquote></blockquote><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div><div><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0.0001pt"><span lang="EN-US"><br></span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div>Thank you very much for you help!<div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Karel Mikan</div></div>