[OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal
alex at mapbox.com
Mon Aug 25 04:08:16 UTC 2014
How would the Collective Database approach work if the OSM Database must
remain unmodified to be part of a Collective Database?
The definition of Collective Database seems to be tailored to use cases
where the OpenStreetMap database *in unmodified form* is part of a larger
database. I can't quite conjure up a real world example, but the ODbL is
pretty clear about this:
> “Collective Database” – Means this Database in unmodified form as part of
a collection of independent databases in themselves that together are
assembled into a collective whole. A work that constitutes a Collective
Database will not be considered a Derivative Database. - See more at:
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:
> On 08/21/2014 06:42 PM, Rob Myers wrote:
> >> It would be great if people would help fill in the blanks, or
> >> correct me where I might have misrepresented the discussion.
> > The page asserts:
> > "Geocodes are a Produced Work
> > The rest of the page then silently slips
> I have tried to present the two different viewpoints in two columns. On
> the left is Alex' original version which claims what you summarized in
> your message (that geocodes are produced works etc.); on the right is a
> version that explicitly claims "A database of Geocodes is a derivative
> database by the definition of the ODbL" - which seems to be exactly the
> statement that you were aiming at, no?
> The "blanks" that need filling are the consequences of this different
> interpreatation for the various use cases. I added one for use case #1,
> but only an empty column for use cases #2-#4 and #7. I added no extra
> column for #5 and #6 because those struck me as identical under both
> interpretations but of course I might be wrong.
> Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the legal-talk