[OSM-legal-talk] Fwd: Re: [OSM-talk] OSM layer into Adobe Illustrator?

[rob at robmyers.org]

Quoting Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemeD.net>:

> You can use GPLed software to produce your own copyrighted works. If
> you draw a map with (say) Inkscape, which is copyleft, there's nothing
> to require that your map should be copyleft.

You can make a non-GPL map with Inkscape because the map is not a 
derivative of
Inkscape's source code. If you released a derivative of Inkscape's 
source code,
it would certainly have to be GPL-ed.

If the map was licensed BY-SA and you released a derivative work of it 
then you
would have to BY-SA the result. This is because you have made a derivative of
it.

It is conceptually impossible to draw a map with OSM data in the same 
sense that
you draw a map with Inkscape. The former is illustration of information 
or fact,
the latter is use of a tool or machine.

So the example of drawing a map using Inkscape is not instructive.

> You can't use CC-SA data to produce your own copyrighted works.

SA is a copyright license. You create a derivative work that you hold joint
copyright on then relicense that as SA in "payment" for the right to 
create the
derivative. So you do create a "copyright work" by the very act of 
making an SA
work. What you do not do is create a proprietary work. That is, you cannot
prevent others from doing what you have in order to disadvantage them.

> If you
> draw a map with OSM data, which is also copyleft, your whole map is
> required to be copyleft.

Assuming that OSM data can be copylefted.

But since anyone else can regenerate the map using OSM's own tools, 
there is no
commercial advantage to making your map proprietary.

Unless you are trying to deny value to the community by making a proprietary
derivative. In which case I'm not sure how this is good for OSM.

> This is why there's a school of thought that says OSM could have a
> more appropriate copyleft licence, which says:

Appropriate for what?

> The advantages are:
>
> - More geodata for OSM. (At present, if you combine OSM data with
> other data to make a map, you don't have to make the other data
> available – just the finished map. Since OSM would prefer to have the
> data than the finished maps, it's a bit of a hollow victory.)

Allowing people to make data proprietary will not result in more data being
provided to the project. That has been disproven by the history of the BSD
license.

> - Works well in ITN-type cases.

If ITN are unclear about either the license or broadcast law then I am 
happy to
talk to them. I have consulted on broadcast projects before. IANAL, though.

> - Attribution requirement can be used to ensure licence compatibility
> with other open/free licences.

BY-SA 3.0 has just been released. It has language in it to allow compatibility
with opther licenses, hopefully the FDL and FAL will be declared compatible at
some point in the future. It is therefore the best target for compatibility.

- Rob.