[OSM-legal-talk] odbl use case questions

[Oliver (skobbler)]

Hi,

>I've looked at the Odbl but can't quite get my head around it; I'd
>like to get input on a couple of use-cases:
>
>[..]
>
>If they do nothing else but serve this one-time snapshot as a base
>layer, what are their obligations?

It would be easier to answer if you could describe what happens to the base
layer? Everything that is "drawn" into the same (logical) database (of the
base layer) will have to be published (it is not clear to me if that is
meant to be active or passive as the license text does not become specific
in this case). The trigger that it has to be published is that the database
is made available to a 3rd party (in case of an organization a subsidiary
would not count, please refer to the license text how a subsidiary is
defined). 

If you "draw" into another (logical) database respectively layer (that is
not linked via node or way IDs, at least if it is more than attributes to a
specific node ID or way ID) then this is considered as Collective Database
and does not fall under the share-alike clause. This applies also for
example in case of a POI collection that is not directly "drawn" into your
base layer. 

Rendering different layers into one graphic is no problem as this is
considered a Produced Work (which requires attribution but does not fall
under the share-alike clause). Exporting several layers into a single shape
file and publishing this (merged) share file would definitely fall under the
share-alike clause (as a shape file would fall under the definition of a
database).

>Secondly, what if one of their staff, being unfamiliar with OSM but a
>GIS expert, sees a problem with one or more roads about which they
>have personal knowledge, and "fixes" those problems in the GIS data
>only--then publishing the result as a mapserver layer only.  What are
>their obligations in this case? 

Again, first you have to see what what publish means? Third party: yes or
no?

In case it is published to a 3rd party then this change has to be made
available. The license does not tell in which format you have to make it
available (although it becomes obvious from the license text that it cannot
be encrypted). In your case you could provide the shape file.

There is no excuse for non-informed staff. It behaves exactly the same as
with commercial licenses. You cannot have illegal copies of commercial
licenses because your staff is not informed. However, the OSM community
welcomes every new user and definitely doesn't try to get reputation for
punishing small mistakes (the latter is a personal viewpoint).

Regards,
Oliver
-- 
View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-odbl-use-case-questions-tp5266754p5267418.html
Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.