[OSM-legal-talk] Paid services from OSM

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Thu Oct 9 00:38:11 BST 2008


Hi,

Simon Ward wrote:
> I think talking about releasing to the public vs non-public is limiting,
> and makes it sound like the derived DB should only be disclosed if the
> product is available to all.
> 
> It should be:  Whoever the product is released to should be able to get
> access to the derived DB.

As pointed out before, this seems to be a real shortcoming of the 
currently available wording - it basically says "if you make something 
public you also have to make the data public", and does not say anything 
about non-public distribution.

I think you are right, it should be pointed out that if you give your 
derived work to someone you don't have to make your data base *public* 
but you have to make it *available to them*.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"




More information about the legal-talk mailing list