[OSM-talk] How is there not any creative-type (US) copyright in OSM data?

[Anthony]

On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 12:32 AM, John Smith <deltafoxtrot256 at gmail.com>wrote:

> 2009/12/13 Anthony <osm at inbox.org>:
> > If CC-BY-SA can enforce what?  Attribution?  If geodata isn't
> copyrightable,
> > then it doesn't matter if the derivative works are released under
> CC-BY-SA.
>
> CC-BY is attribution, CC-BY-SA is Attribution with Share Alike.
>

And what does Share Alike mean?  "If you alter, transform, or build upon
this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or
similar license to this one."

If geodata is not copyrightable, then Share Alike is meaningless.  The
original work is public domain, and the modified work is also public domain.


> While geodata might not be, the meta data should be imho, but I'm not
> a lawyer nor profess to be, and it would take legal action to actually
> settle it one way or the other and that is on a per jurisdiction
> basis.
>

The point is, whichever way it's decided, it'll be the same for the modified
data as it is for the original data.  If the OSM database is not
copyrightable, neither will the modified database be.  If the OSM database
is copyrightable, then the modified database must be.

ODBL is trying to add extra legal layers to CC-BY-SA by not relying on
> just copyright to enforce the SA part.
>

ODBL is trying to enforce requirements beyond "If you alter, transform, or
build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the
same or similar license to this one."  Most significantly, a requirement to
"offer to recipients of the Derivative Database or Produced Work a copy in a
machine readable form of [...] The Derivative Database (under a.) or
alteration file (under b.)".  That is not at all a requirement of CC-BY-SA.
It is something completely new that is being added, which IMO makes things
less free, not more free.

If you'd prefer that, fine.  But please be honest about this - the ODbL is
more than just a more enforceable version of the spirit of CC-BY-SA.  The
requirements go beyond requiring derivative works to be licensed under the
same license.  Most significantly, the ODbL requires people to offer copies
of any derivative databases that are used in the making of the final
derivative work.  Among other things, that means having to keep copies of
such databases, something which is not always done (if I want to alter the
database, render tiles, and then throw out the altered database, I'm not
able to do that, because I have to offer people copies of the altered
database).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20091213/7657ca76/attachment.html>