[OSM-legal-talk] Licenses for Produced Works under ODbL

[Igor Brejc]

Hi Michael,

First of all, thanks for the link. I've read it carefully and it doesn't
really answer my questions, it just raises some new ones. Those guidelines,
as they are written, treat the issue of proprietary/closed source code very
superficially and without considering too much the practical consequences.
They also don't really answer the question "what is a Database". Let's
take, for example, the statement "Rendering databases, for example those
produced by Osm2pgsql, are clearly databases". First of all, what are
"rendering databases"? I don't share the same "clearliness" of that
statement, frankly.

Another issue is "machine-readable form" of an algorithm. Who says I should
interpret that as a source code? And if I do, under what license
can/should/must I release the source code? I'm certainly not going to
release my work under the Public Domain.

I think the core issue that needs to be addressed and answered is: *is
there a place for proprietary/closed source software in OSM ecosystem*? If
we follow the "strict reading" logic of the mentioned guideliness and the
one expressed in Frederik's answer, I would certainly have to say the
answer is NO.

I see some serious issues with the way how we approach the whole ODbL
thing. As someone who has invested a lot of time and energy into OSM and
who is trying to find a business model that would enable me to stay in the
OSM domain, I think the core questions about ODbL have not been answered
and this scares people/companies off. If the OSM community wants all the
OSM-based software to be open source, then please say so. But please treat
all the players the same: Apple, esri, Google and one-man-band companies.

Best regards,
Igor

On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 9:34 AM, Michael Collinson <mike at ayeltd.biz> wrote:

> **
> Hi Igor,
>
> I wonder if this resource helps with your question?
>
>
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Trivial_Transformations_-_Guideline(a work in progress)
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> On 22/10/2012 18:45, Igor Brejc wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>  Thanks for your clarifications, everybody. I was under the (looks like
> wrong) impression the produced work must also be available under the ODbL
> license.
> One issue still bugs me though:
>
>  If the closed software you have used did not work on the data directly,
>> but on some sort of pre-processed or augmented data, then *that* would be
>> the data you have to hand over.
>
>
>  What does "pre-processed or augmented" data really mean? OSM data has to
> be preprocessed to get to the form suitable for rendering. Some examples of
> preprocessing:
>
>    1. Importing it into PostGIS and flattening the geometries (like
>    Mapnik does it).
>    2. Generalizations: simplifications of roads, polygons etc. for a
>    certain map scale.
>    3. Finding suitable label placements.
>    4. Extracting topology from the data (like multipolygon processing,
>    merging of polygons, road segments etc.).
>    5. Running other complex algorithms on the OSM data.
>
>  This preprocessing can be done "on-the" fly or (in case of Mapnik) as a
> separate prerequisite step.
>
>  Igor
>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 10/22/12 12:07, Igor Brejc wrote:
>>
>>>  2. I generate a PDF map from that extract using an unpublished,
>>>
>>>     closed-source software. The map includes the appropriate OSM
>>>     attribution text.
>>>
>>
>>   1. Is this possible?
>>>
>>
>> Yes (assuming that the PDF is not a database).
>>
>> >  2. What are my obligations in terms of ODbL license? What (if
>> anything)
>>
>> >     do I have to provide, publish etc.?
>>
>>  Recipients of the PDF, i.e. anyone who views iStockPhoto, would have the
>> right to ask you to hand over the database on which the map is based. You
>> would then have the option of saying "it's plain OSM, simply download it
>> from <X>", or actually give them the data.
>>
>> If the closed software you have used did not work on the data directly,
>> but on some sort of pre-processed or augmented data, then *that* would be
>> the data you have to hand over.
>>
>>   3. Would there be a difference if it was PNG/SVG instead of PDF?
>>>
>>
>> I don't think so.
>>
>>   4. Can the buyer of such a map then password-protect his own resulting
>>>
>>>     work (which includes that map)?
>>>
>>
>> Yes. You will have sold him the work under the condition that he
>> continues to attribute OSM, but other than that he has no obligations
>> (unless you put some in).
>>
>> If you sell the work with an OSM attribution but without the condition to
>> perpetuate that attribution, you may be in breach of ODbL or you may not;
>> this depends on how you interpret the "suitably calculated to make anyone
>> ... aware" clause.
>>
>> Bye
>> Frederik
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20121029/c55600ac/attachment.html>