[OSM-legal-talk] Editing Derived Database Extracts and ODbL

[Oliver (skobbler)]

>"Share-Alike: If you publicly use any adapted version of this database,
>or works produced from an adapted database, you must also offer that
>adapted database under the ODbL."
>
>(I am trusting/hoping the human readable terms match the legalese.)
>
>So...my question is: how _useful_ does the derived database have to be? 
>
>Does the ODbL require any "usefulness" to diffs, or only that the
>available  database materials exactly match any temporary database used
>to create a produced work? 

The first question is if the adapted database needs be offered "actively" or
"passively" (meaning on demand). I would assume that it only needs to be
offered "on demand" when I try to assume the concept behind it: The
intention is that if you add something to the source that is valuable for
the community then the community should have the chance to integrate the
addition also into the source. This will only happen if someone of the
community is prepared to take the effort, which would require it to be of
significant value.

>But, what if I do something really rude like remove all of the node IDs?
>  The derived database might have some very useful properties, but it
>will be a truly royal PITA to apply back to OSM.

If you keep a relation to the node IDs then these must be handed out as
well. If you have deleted the node IDs then it probably becomes a "Produced
Work" but as long as it remains in a state where you can update the
temporary database with more recent OSM data then this requires a link from
the OSM IDs to your elements in the temporary database. The key question
here is if the temporary database keeps a link to the OSM database and then
this link must be provided as well.

Regards,
Oliver
-- 
View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-Editing-Derived-Database-Extracts-and-ODbL-tp5070659p5084064.html
Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.