[OSM-legal-talk] Using OSM data, to generate game worlds. How does the license apply to projects like this?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 11 February 2021, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk wrote:
> Hi Lucas,
> I disagree with Christoph re the LIDAR survey. Under the Collective
> Database Guideline
> (https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Col
>lective_Database_Guideline_Guideline), if you use solely a non-OSM
> source for building heights (versus improving OSM building heights
> data with LIDAR data), you do not need to share back your height data
> source. Same with weather data. Please note that opinions on this
> listserv are just that, opinions. You do need to look at the
> Guidelines for yourself, and if your situation is particularly
> complex, consult an attorney.

And please also note that the OSMF guidelines are just that as well -
opinions.  What ultimately counts here is the text of the ODbL and the
intentions of the OSM community when adopting this license and when
agreeing to the contributor terms.  The OSMF is free to formulate
guidelines stating their interpretation of the ODbL but under the
contributor terms they have no authority to license the OSM data under
terms other than those of the ODbL.

If you generate a new database (one of 3d models of buildings) from OSM
building footprint data and LIDAR point cloud data that is quite
evidently not a collective database but a derivative database.  Even if
you try to weasel around this by declaring the footprint data and the
height data separate databases the height attributes determined from
the LIDAR data would evidently be a derivative of both the LIDAR data
and the OSM building footprint data.  A collective database would
require the OSM sourced components and the data from other sources to
be independent from each other.

Some have in the past floated the hypothesis that a derivative of a
substantial amount of OSM data can be something other than a derivative
database, a collective database or a produced work and as such not be
subject to the ODbL at all.  That idea (in German i would characterize
it as "Die Weltraumhypothese unter den ODbL-Interpretationen") is
however not on a very solid basis.

If you want to make sure to minimize what you give back to the OSM
community for using their data then the advice Kathleen gave - to
consult an attorney capable to give you binding legal advice - is a
good idea - even if most likely such an attorney would give you
substantially the same advice in the end.  If you just want to be on
the safe side assuming in cases of doubt that you have a derivative
database will always work.  The loss in potential profits you have from
sharing data that you legally might not absolutely be required to share
will often be smaller than what a qualified attorney will charge you
for their advice. :-)

--
Christoph Hormann
https://www.imagico.de/