[OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

Frederik Ramm frederik at remote.org
Wed Aug 20 20:58:12 UTC 2014


On 07/25/2014 11:39 AM, Simon Poole wrote:
> As I've said before, I'm not convinced that trying to better define and
> clarify the issue by invoking the "produced work" clauses will lead to a
> satisfactory result. I would suggest that at least a comparison (for all
> your use cases) with a model based on "the information that is used for
> geocoding is subject to share alike, but nothing else" (which has been
> suggested in this discussion and previously a number of times).

I have made a start on this comparison by adding a second column to


outlining the position/results of the "stuff used for geocoding makes a
derivative database but only that and not the additional info" approach.

I call it the "collective database" alternative because the idea is that
your proprietary data (store opening times or whatnot) form a collective
database with the ODbL-Share-Alike location data.

It would be great if people would help fill in the blanks, or correct me
where I might have misrepresented the discussion.


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

More information about the legal-talk mailing list