[OSM-legal-talk] License clarification

[Kathleen Lu]

The way I understand the use, the OSM data is used to identify areas that
are to be discarded. Data in those areas are discarded. Thus, the OSM data
is not kept either, and no OSM data in the final dataset. Thus, there is no
derivative database containing OSM data.

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 3:36 PM Christoph Hormann <chris_hormann at gmx.de>
wrote:

> On Wednesday 06 June 2018, Andrew Pon wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > Given that we are using open street maps to just remove pixels at an
> > early stage of processing, would we be able to just put a statement
> > in our written reports saying that open street maps was used in this
> > masking process, or would we have to make our final displacement
> > database freely available?
>
> Two things are important here IMO:
>
> * in any case attribution will be required for any public use of the
> data in the form required by the ODbL unless you can argue that use of
> OSM data is insubstantial.
>
> * if you would need to make available your data set under an open
> license depends on if there is a derivative database containing both
> OSM and non-OSM data somewhere in your process.  If what you do is just
> masking the water areas in visualizations of your data the answer to
> that is clearly no.  But if you mask the data early in a more elaborate
> process and do further processing afterwards based on a data set that
> is an inseparable combination of both data sources the situation is not
> that clear.
>
> --
> Christoph Hormann
> http://www.imagico.de/
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20180606/d1ce970a/attachment.html>