[OSM-legal-talk] ZIP codes from OSM in non-compatible licensed dataset

Kathleen Lu kathleen.lu at mapbox.com
Fri Oct 11 17:49:33 UTC 2019


Cost is a relevant factor in database protection law, which is one of the
>> rights covered by the licence. First, a database is not protected unless
>> there has been "substantial investment" in its making.
>>
>
>
>
> "substantial investment" is not the same as monetary cost. The human time
> that is needed to collect and arrange the data is also an investment.
>
> Of course they are not equivalent, and human time is another type of
investment. However, cost still remains a relevant factor of consideration.


>
>>
>> All that said, I am still of the opinion that it is not necessary to find
>> the exact line here, because the original use Lars-Daniel proposed was one
>> of a collective database so long as the two sets of ZIP properties were
>> kept in separate columns, which he appeared quite comfortable with.
>>
>
>
>
> are kept in separate columns and are not used in combination/both to
> create a produced work?
>
> Lars-Daniel already said that they are kept in separate columns and not
de-duplicated. There is no requirement that, in order to function as a
Collective Database, data types may not be used together to create a
Produced Work. To the contrary, the guidance is that the most axiomatic
Produced Work, a global map, may be created from multiple Collective
Databases consisting of different data types and/or different countries.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20191011/ed014dfb/attachment.html>


More information about the legal-talk mailing list