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

[Kai Krueger]

Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) wrote
> So the way I see it, if there's any (substantial) addition of external
> geo-data along the way, then that addition creates a derivative
> database, before the produced work is created. So if you want to
> publicly use this database (or any produced work based on it) then
> either the derivative database must be shared-alike, or the algorithm
> used to produce it and any additional input data must be shared.
> 
> In the case of any substanitial amount of geocoding, you are clearly
> having to add additional geographic data to the OSM data in order to
> do the geocoding.

I would interpret it as quite the opposite and you are not adding any
substantial amount of geographical information.

You do query the db with external geo-data. But if the geocoder gives you a
result, the information was (in this form) already in the OSM database and
so you haven't added anything. If the data was not already in the OSM
database, then the geocoder will not spit out any result and thus you
haven't created any derived database (or anything else for that matter).

So in either case, the result(s) from the geocoding process are pure
OpenStreetMap data and there is no additional external geo-data added to the
output. Therefore this process then also does not trigger the share-a-like
clause in it self. And so as long as you don't use the resultant lat/lon in
a way incompatible with the definition of produced work, geocoding itself is
fine.




--
View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-Updated-geocoding-community-guideline-proposal-tp5811077p5811673.html
Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.