[OSM-legal-talk] Concerns about ODbL

[Jean-Christophe Haessig]

Le lundi 02 mars 2009 à 14:14 +0100, Frederik Ramm a écrit :

> No. If that were the case then OSM would have gone PD long ago and we 
> would all be mapping happily instead of wasting our time trying to 
> create freedom from the barrel of a license (kudos to JohnW for this 
> phrase).

Ok, I believe I just read comments at the wrong time: each time I
followed a signature to an User page on the wiki, I found the PD banner.

> You misunderstood. The basic quality of OSM is that it is a database. If 
> it were not a database it would be utterly useless (sit down for a 
> minute and think of what you would do with OSM data that was not 
> arranged in a database - you are unlikely to find anything).

So we need a license for the fact that the data is collected into a
database. That’s quite abstract, since every bit of real data would not
be covered by the ODbL, but another (which one ?) license.

[snip stuff about t-shirt example]

I do not see where the license requires the data used to produce the
Produced Work must be published under the ODbL. Quoting the ODbL :

«4.3 Notice for using output (Data). Creating and Using a Produced Work
does not require the notice in Section 4.2. However, if you publicly Use
a Produced Work, You must include a notice within, on, or as part of the
Produced Work reasonably calculated to make any Person that uses, views,
accesses, interacts with, or is otherwise exposed to the Produced Work
aware that content was obtained from the Database, Derivative Database,
or the Database as part of a Collective Database and that the Database
is available under this Licence.»

It only states that the Produced Work must include a notice that the
original data was obtained from :
a. The Database (OSM), or
b. a Derivative Database (author’s of PW copy, not public), or
c. the Database (OSM), as part of a larger collection.
And, the Produced Work must also add to that notice that the Database
(OSM) is available under the ODbL.

Nowhere can I read that the Derivative Database (if it exists) must be
made public under the ODbL.

JC
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message num?riquement sign?e
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20090302/c7dd2a52/attachment.pgp>