[OSM-talk] collective and derived work - a real world example
peter.miller at itoworld.com
Wed Jul 4 11:28:57 BST 2007
I suggest that this conversation continues on legal-talk only and that any
conclusions are reported back the main list in due course rather than
running the thread on both lists.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frederik Ramm [mailto:frederik at remote.org]
> Sent: 04 July 2007 10:08
> To: Peter Miller
> Cc: OSM Openstreetmap; legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> Subject: Re: [OSM-talk] collective and derived work - a real world example
> > My company wants to use OSM data in conjunction with other
> > copyright scheduled transport data to produce an animated movie of
> > public transport movements in the UK (or a part of the UK). We
> > would use OSM data for the base mapping (coastline, Trunk and
> > Primary road and the railway line) and copyright schedules
> > detailing trains and or buses movements. We believe we would be
> > able to get agreement from the copyright holders for the scheduled
> > transport information to licence the resulting movie under the same
> > creative commons share-like license used by OSM
> We have a consensus that using OSM as the base map in an overlay
> application (like OpenLayers) doesn't make the whole application a
> derived work (so you are allowed to create a web site that uses an
> OSM base layer and some proprietary layers on top, and license that
> web site any way you want). I know you don't like it when I write of
> "consensus" but this has been said or implied by many people during
> license discussions, and no-one ever objected.
> If you now create a video of such an overlay, you merge the layers
> into something that cannot be separated. I'd say that by doing so,
> the end product now becomes a derived work and has to be licensed CC-
> If the copyright holders of the other layer data have agreed to this,
> I see absolutely no reason why your plan should not work.
> CC-BY-SA "infection" works forwards only - derived products have to
> be licensed CC-BY-SA. No part of CC-BY-SA postulates that other
> components used together with a CC-BY-SA licensed content must
> somehow "reversely" become CC-BY-SA.
> As for the TV company using your resulting CC-BY-SA movie: I would be
> entirely happy with that but your "what if they set it to music"
> questions are tough and I'd rather not think about that lest I get a
> There was a huge discussion in February as someone from ITN wanted to
> use an OSM map of Baghdad. Entry point here:
> The result of that discussion was that our data wasn't really what
> they needed anyway, but if it had been, they would have shied away
> from using it because of legal uncertainties. The discussion brought
> to daylight a lot of interesting things, for example many assumed
> that crediting "OSM" would be sufficient while others pointed out
> that OSM is not the copyright holder, but individual mappers license
> their data under CC-BY-SA and so must be credited individually.
> Others pointed out that the CC-BY-SA as a provision about crediting
> "if practical" or so and it would be impractical to list 100s of
> names in a TV spot. The worst thing, in my eyes, that resulted from
> that discussion was that OSM itself is neither willing nor able to
> offer legal guidance or even certainty to commercial users - i.e.
> there's no one here who can tell them, in writing, that their
> intended purpose is within the license. Not surprisingly, this
> results in very limited use of our data in the business world.
> I'd suggest to take this to the legal-talk list (Cc'ed).
> Frederik Ramm ## eMail frederik at remote.org ## N49°00.09' E008°23.33'
More information about the talk