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

[Alex Barth]

On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 2:30 AM, Paul Norman <penorman at mac.com> wrote:

> > Consider a chain retailer's database of store locations with store
> > names and addresses (street, house number, ZIP, state/province,
> country).
> > The addresses are used to search corresponding latitude / longitude
> > coordinates in OpenStreetMap. The coordinates are stored next to the
> > store locations in the store database (forward Geocoding).
> > OpenStreetMap.org's Nominatim based geocoder is used. The store
> locations
> > are being exposed to the public on a store locator map using Bing maps.
> > The geocoded store locations database remains fully proprietary to the
> > chain retailer. The map carries a notice "(c) OpenStreetMap contributors"
> > linking to http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright.
>
> In this example, the database powering the geocoder is a derived database.
> The geocoding results are produced works, which are then collected into
> what forms a derivative database as part of a collective database.
>

Not following how I can make a Derivative Database from a Produced Work.
Once it's a Produced Work it's a Produced Work, right? Sure if I abuse to
recreate OSM that's one thing, but at this level?

Taking a step back, is the above use case not one we'd like to support
without triggering share alike? I'm directing my question to everyone, not
just Paul who's taken the time to review my example above.

Forward and reverse geocoding existing records is such a huge potential use
case for OSM, helping us drive contributions. At the same time it's _the_
use case of OSM where we collide heads on with the realities and messiness
of data licensing: Do we really want to make a legal review the hurdle of
entry for using OSM for geocoding? Or limit using OSM for geocoding in
areas where "no one's ever going to sue"? How can we get on the same page
on how we want geocoding to work and then trace back on how we can fit this
into the ODbL? Geocoding should just be possible and frictionless with OSM,
no? Shouldn't there be a way to open up OSM to geocoding while maintaining
share alike on the whole database?

I feel we don't get anywhere by reading the tea leaves of the ODbL - what
do we really want for OSM on geocoding?

Alex

(and yes, when I'm saying geocoding I'm referring to permanent geocoding
here, where the geocoding result winds up being stored in someone else's db)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20140724/c59bf4a8/attachment.html>