[OSM-legal-talk] Feedback requested ... OSM Poland data

LM_1 flukas.robot+osm at gmail.com
Sat Mar 10 21:15:21 GMT 2012


Verfication would be a process of comparing my own data (lets's call
them A) with osm, likely using some automated precess, that would
output a set of locations or areas where the maps differ more than a
given threshold (dataset B).
Legally you now have three datasets A, OSM and a derivative work of
both (B). Dataset B would be used as a to-do list to resurvey or
reimport data from other sources than OSM. OSM data is not copied, but
were used for verification.
This should actually be completely legal now - derivatives works are
allowed, if not published no specific licence character is required.
Actual data for updating is taken from somewhere else.

If the clause is added that data verification requires publication
under free/open licence, it would actually tighten the licence, since
I highly doubt that independently acquired data on places where maps
differ could be treated as derivative work.

LM_1
2012/3/10 Rob Myers <rob at robmyers.org>:
> On 09/03/12 22:36, LM_1 wrote:
>> Why not make this rule general (outside Poland) "any data published
>> under free and open licence (whatever it is) can be verified by OSM
>> data".
>> This brings no risk, that anyony "big and evil" (whatever that is)
>> will use it to overrun OSM...
>> LM_1
>
> What is verification?
>
> If it is altering data to recreate OSM data, we are using "verification"
> to excuse copying.
>
> If it is looking at the map, we are using "verification" to damn reading
> a map.
>
> So I'm not sure verification is a useful term. Describing the boring
> mechanical actions that are being performed is probably more useful, as
> these are easier to consider against the actions permitted by the licence.
>
> - Rob.
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk



More information about the legal-talk mailing list