[OSM-legal-talk] Reverse Geocoding

Andy Robinson (blackadder) blackadderajr at googlemail.com
Thu Apr 3 20:37:17 BST 2008

Richard Fairhurst wrote:
>Sent: 03 April 2008 8:25 PM
>To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
>Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Reverse Geocoding
>Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> What's your opinion? And would it change should the proposed new
>> license
>> get adopted?
>a. It's a bit of a moot point, because CC-BY-SA doesn't force you to
>distribute; so if the company generates the invoice and sends it to
>their customers, who don't distribute it any further, the matter
>doesn't arise.
>b. I tend to agree with you that a minuscule extract can't be protected.
>c. Under ODL (the proposed licence) you're not really creating a
>derivative database - at the very most you're creating an "integrated
>experience" - so the sharealike isn't triggered. ODL doesn't really
>infect things that aren't data(bases), such as an invoice.
>d. To be safe I'd suggest an acknowledgement to OSM somewhere on the
>invoice; again, I suspect that b. means you may not even need that,
>but it's good practice anyway.

And if they wanted to contribute their GPS traces to OSM that would be cool
too :-)



>legal-talk mailing list
>legal-talk at openstreetmap.org

More information about the legal-talk mailing list