[OSM-legal-talk] ODbL for the DB; what about the contents?

[Simon Ward]

On Thu, Oct 09, 2008 at 04:54:54PM +0200, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Simon Ward wrote:
> > Your argument would also suggest that there is no need for the factual
> > licence. 
> 
> Yes there is; it would protect users who extract a non-substantial 
> amount of data against any claims from anybody.

As would a share-alike version.

> > This comes down to PD vs permissive vs share-alike, and I’ve seen this
> > be discussed to bits in the past.
> 
> Yes, and the ODBL/Factual combo is a good compromise in that it is 
> basically an PD for non-substantial things and basically an 
> attribution-only license for "experiences" created from OSM data; it 
> only has full share-alike for the bits that are of interest to us: the 
> data.

*Your* interest is clearly limited (or biased based on other interests).

> Remember that we're a project creating a free world map, not a 
> project creating a free world.

I’m about creating a world map that’s free for the world and remains
free for the world.

> In my eyes what you're proposing would not even work. The whole idea 
> behind the new license is that if you make some kind of artistic work or 
> so based on OSM data, you can have full copyright with any license you 
> want on the resulting work, you only have to share-alike the data base 
> behind it.

The database only covers extraction of a substantial proportion.  I
think any of the data should be covered.  A factual share-alike licence
can help enforce this.

I *don’t* believe that independently created data combined with OSM
data, however unsubstantial, should come under the licence.

I *don’t* believe that a web page, article, poster, or whatever should
come under the licence just becuause it contains a couple of POIs from
OSM.

I *do* believe that any change to the data used, however unsubstantial
in terms of the database licence, should still be freely redistributed
and remain so.  Where there is power to restrict data copying, this is
used to enable and enforce it.

> I thought that there was a consensus that this is what we 
> want: Let the T-Shirt designer have ownership of his OSM-based T-Shirt 
> design, as long as we get the data improvements he made to achieve this.
> 
> Now if you start opening up the possibility that individual data items 
> might themselves be under a share-alike license, how can the T-Shirt 
> designer own his creative work? He would have to make the T-Shirt design 
> share-alike just as it is now. That basically breaks everything that is 
> good about the new license.

See above.  The whole t-shirt design need not come under such a factual
share-alike licence at all.

Simon
-- 
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a
simple system that works.—John Gall
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20081009/a9bcbd3b/attachment.pgp>