[OSM-legal-talk] ODbL: Produced Works other than maps

[Arne Johannessen]

On 28.03.2010, at 11:17, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Arne Johannessen wrote:
>>
>> [bakeries in London]
>
> A reasoning according to which the map image with bakeries painted on
> would also be a derived database which, as I already said, is surely  
> not
> the intention of OSM's implementation of the ODbL.

I assumed the bakeries were already present in OSM as shop=bakery  
nodes, but understand now you meant for them to be added from another  
source?


>> [Produced Work concept]
>>
>> So far I have yet to discover its actual use. Pointers are
>> appreciated. :)
>
> The actual use is that you can create map images from OSM data which
> then do NOT fall under the ODbL.

Sorry for being a bit sloppy with my language in my earlier message.  
Technically, images aren't databases, but the graphical content might  
be a database *representation*. In that sense, images of OSM data  
including OSM map tiles would indeed be a Produced Work I guess.

But the point is that even though the image itself isn't covered by  
sui generis database rights, the actual content *displayed* in the  
image still is. That's what I think the ODBL means with section 4.4 (c):

# A Derivative Database is Publicly Used and so must comply with
# Section 4.4. if a Produced Work created from the Derivative Database
# is Publicly Used.

Since your map or list of bakeries was to be made public on the web,  
any OSM data you included may be reused directly from your map or  
list, hence attribution as per section 4.2 ODBL is required (for the  
OSM database or significant extract the map or list is based upon).

In other words, while the map image may not strictly speaking fall  
under the ODBL, the map data still does.


> This is essential if one is to combine
> data from, say, a CC-BY-SA data source and our ODbL data source into  
> one
> map image; were the image considered a Derived Database, the ODbL  
> viral
> aspect would kick in and require you to license the image under ODbL
> which would clash with CC-BY-SA's requirement to license the image  
> under
> CC-BY-SA.

Ah, right; thanks for this use case for Produced Works. However, I'd  
say what happens here from a legal point of view once OSM adopts the  
ODBL is probably more like this:

(1) An excerpt of the OSM database is created, forming an ODBL  
Derivative Database. [§§ 1, 3.1(b), 4.4(b) ODBL]

(2) The CC-BY-SA database and the result of (1) are combined, forming  
an ODBL Collective Database which is also a CC-BY-SA Collection. [§§  
1(b), 3(a) BY-SA, §§ 1, 3.1(c) ODBL]

(3) An image is created from the result of (2), forming an ODBL  
Produced Work which is also a CC-BY-SA Adaption. [§§ 1(a), 3(b) BY-SA,  
§§ 1, 4.5(b) ODBL]

(4) The result of (3) is made public on the web. [§ 3(d) BY-SA, §§  
3.1(e) ODBL]

Restrictions for (4):
- The result of (1) must be made available under the terms of the  
ODBL. [§ 4.4(b) ODBL]
- The result of (3) must be made available under the terms of CC-BY- 
SA. [§ 4(b) BY-SA]
- Required notices must be given. [§§ 3(b), 4(b), 4(c) BY-SA, §§ 4.2,  
4.3 ODBL]
- ... (further restrictions not relevant)

In plain English, the ODBL continues to apply to those map contents  
that ware taken from an ODBL source without virally 'infecting' the  
other map contents. The final map image is, however, covered by CC-BY- 
SA in its completeness.


> [...]
>
>> This is what the Produced Work thing might have meant: Cases where  
>> the
>> database's contents appear outside the database theme's domain.
>
> No, the Produced Work specifically meant something like this:
>
> http://c.tile.openstreetmap.org/12/2076/1410.png
>
> It is important to us that something like that does not require to be
> licensed under ODbL. [...]

A single map tile is unlikely to even qualify as a database under  
either the ODBL or the EU database directive.

Large collections of tiles that are directly based on an OSM excerpt  
with no modifications (such as the tiles used on osm.org) would  
certainly qualify as a database under the EU directive. I now think  
ODBL would call these a 'Produced Work resulting from the use of a  
Derivative Database', requiring attribution of the source as per §§  
4.2, 4.4(c) ODBL.

The same principle applies for printed maps. I think the MapOSMatic  
maps would fall into this category, to name but one example.

However, if one plans to combine ODBL data with a database not covered  
by ODBL (as in your CC-BY-SA example above), I believe ODBL's  
Collective Database concept is the only possible way this can work if  
you want to avoid the viral aspect of ODBL.

Cheers,
Arne

-- 
Arne Johannessen