[OSM-legal-talk] Would The ODbL and BY-SA Clash In A Database Extracted From a BY-SA Produced Work?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

Anthony wrote:
>> Then again a PNG that
>> simply contains a coded version of the full database would certainly be a
>> database as far as we're concerned.
> 
> Why would it matter?

I think it is meant as an added safeguard against reverse engineering.

ODbL already says that if you extract the database from a Produced Work 
then what you get is an ODbL database, so even if someone encodes the 
full database into a PNG then releases that CC-BY, someone else who 
extracts the database doesn't gain anything (he doesn't suddently end up 
with a non-share-alike database). However it is even better if we have a 
theoretical means to stop people from distributing such special PNGs 
under CC-BY.

>> "If it was intended for the extraction of the original data, then it is a
>> database and not a Produced Work. Otherwise it is a Produced Work."
>>
>> See
>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Produced_Work_-_Guideline.
> 
> LOL, I hope you go with that definition.

Actually, I liked an earlier version better: "If someone makes something 
from an ODbL dataset and declares it a Produced Work, then it is 
considered a Produced Work." - It is refreshingly simple and doesn't 
actually open any loopholes because even if you took the full DB and put 
the PostGIS dump on a CD declaring it a Produced Work, someone who used 
it would fall under the reverse engineering clause.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frederik at remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"