[OSM-legal-talk] sharealike trigger

Paul Norman penorman at mac.com
Tue Jul 23 05:46:30 UTC 2013

> From: John Bazik [mailto:me at johnbazik.com]
> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2013 9:55 PM
> To: Licensing and other legal discussions.
> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] sharealike trigger
> > Well there's a pretty strong precedent by the largest user of OSM data
> > to not consider user data part of the same database as the map data:
> > osm.org
> I'm glad to hear that.
> So, is it fair to say that, as an OSM database user, one can distinguish
> derivative and non-derivative data field by field, without considering
> the schema?  That is, the "derivative database" is just that collection
> of fields that are considered derivative?

What do you mean by fields?

Keep in mind that databases don't even necessarily involve computers, and
the same law still applies. I really think it's best to avoid any RDMS

One description for the OSM map database (planet.osm) is a database of
georeferenced shapes (including points) with associated data (what the shape
represents) and meta-data (time edited, user edited by, etc). I am very
tempted to try converting some OSM data from the XML format to a database
made by a set of index cards, instead of the normal database made of a few
tables in a RDMS "database".

> > This makes it clear that share-alike isn't triggered just by
> > associating information (such as user accounts) with the map, but by
> > the addition of observed physical features (routes being taken by
> > users, perhaps?)
> I'm particularly interested in the application of the ODBL, in OSM's
> case, to routes.  How are routes "observed physical features?"  I
> understand that if one were to create an OSM-derived database of
> roadways that added on-street parking information, that that added data
> is an observed physical feature of those roadways that would trigger the
> sharealike provision.

You appear to of misquoted me, I don't think I said what you have in your

More information about the legal-talk mailing list