[OSM-legal-talk] Best license for future tiles?

Anthony osm at inbox.org
Thu Nov 18 16:40:25 GMT 2010


On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 9:58 AM, Ed Avis <eda at waniasset.com> wrote:
> Richard Fairhurst <richard at ...> writes:
>>Yes. ODbL is very clear that there's an attribution requirement (4.3).
>
> Yes, that's right, but I also wanted to ask about the other requirement that
> at times has been ascribed to the ODbL: that you cannot reverse-engineer the
> produced map tiles, so they cannot be fairly described as CC-BY-SA or CC-BY
> or indeed anything other than ODbL or 'all rights reserved'.

That's not exactly the argument.

You can reverse-engineer the produced map tiles.  But one
interpretation of the ODbL (which I find to be persuasive) is that any
significant extract of data which you obtained from such
reverse-engineering would be ODbL, to the extent that a) it's
copyrightable; b) it's protected by database rights; or c) you agreed
to the ODbL.



More information about the legal-talk mailing list