[OSM-talk] Using editors to indicate license preference.

[Anthony]

On Sun, Jan 17, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org> wrote:

> Anthony wrote:
>
>> But I think you're missing the fact that sites which try to restrict
>> people from copying their databases pretty much universally do not provide
>> database dumps.
>>
>
> I don't think that matters at all. Whether or not a database dump is
> provided universally, or by accident, or not at all, does not make a
> difference regarding rights to the data(base). It is just an implementation
> detail.
>

It doesn't make a difference regarding rights to the data(base), but it does
make a big difference to the de facto ability to enforce restrictions on the
data(base).  This is especially true when copyright rights are explicitly
waived.  Database rights are not very strong, and they are not universal,
which is *why* "sites which try to restrict people from copying their
databases pretty much universally do not provide database dumps".  And
database rights are not even clearly applicable to the OSMF:

<quote source="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_Directive">While
copyright protects the creativity of an author, database rights specifically
protect the "qualitatively and/or quantitatively [a] substantial investment
in either the obtaining, verification or presentation of the
contents"</quote>

OSMF did not obtain or verify the data in the OSM database.  I suppose you
could say they present it, but the presentation part isn't the part the they
want to restrict anyway.

I still don't see how setting up a bunch of servers and telling people to
make maps gives you a database right, but I have to admit I'm not an expert
in database rights, since they don't apply to me here in Florida.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20100117/9e88a259/attachment.html>