[OSM-legal-talk] Exception in Open DataLicense/Community Guidelines for temporary file

[David Groom]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Fairhurst" <richard at systemed.net>
To: <legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 10:53 AM
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Exception in Open DataLicense/Community 
Guidelines for temporary file


>
> Jonathan Harley wrote:
>> Really I'm at a loss to see the point of the share-alike clause (4.4).
>> I can't think of a use-case for OSM where processing the database
>> doesn't reduce the amount of information.
>
> The canonical case, often cited by those who say OSM needs a share-alike
> licence, is to prevent commercial map providers taking the data we have 
> and
> they don't (e.g. footpaths), adding it to the data they have but we don't
> (e.g. complete road network), and not giving us anything back.
>
> IRMFI, not because I believe it myself. :)
>
> cheers
> Richard
>
>
That would certainly seem a very good thing.  In lots of peoples opinion 
where you *add* data, then it is good if that data can be shared back to the 
community.

However where you *don't* add data, but merely process the OSM data, either 
by extracting some sub-set of it, or simply by transforming it from one form 
of database to another, then what is the point of requiring compliance with 
ODbL clause 4.6.

Regards

David