[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