[OSM-talk] Licence of Facebook's derived road datasets? ODbL?

[Yuri Astrakhan]

stevea, I would not be exactly the same person without OSM. Does it mean
ODbL applies to me?  A hammer was used to build a house, but the house does
not have hammer's copyright. Just because some data was used in the process
does not necessarily mean that whoever saw that data taints everything they
touch from thereon with ODbL license. In some cases it does, like when
portions of OSM data make it into the final product, but I seriously doubt
that if someone computes average time OSM editors contribute to the OSM
project, and publishes that average, and afterwards someone else publishes
how often someone publishes papers about OSM community, they must use ODbL
license... Even though that last research paper would not be possible
without the first research paper, which would not be possible without OSM
data.

On Thu, Nov 14, 2019 at 5:53 PM stevea <steveaOSM at softworkers.com> wrote:

> While exactly "the data" may not be "in" the derived work, because of the
> process of their creation, "their spirit" are in the derived work, as they
> were a part of the new data's production.  That strongly seems "derived" to
> me, whether that "spirit" is inspirational or gives rise to "do include
> this, don't include that."  These decisions are based upon OSM data, so OSM
> is being "derived" to make the new work.
>
> Again, if the data aren't derived from OSM, please create them exactly the
> same withOUT OSM data and "then we shall see" (whether OSM data are
> necessary or optional for the new work's duplicate creation).  If you can
> do that without OSM data, please do so.  If you MUST use OSM data (even if
> no actual OSM data end up in the final work), then please agree that the
> final work is at least partly derived from OSM data.
>
> This doesn't seem that difficult to do on a verbal level, though again,
> I'm not sure of how it holds up legally.
>
> SteveA
> California
>
> > On Nov 14, 2019, at 2:45 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer <dieterdreist at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I guess the law often doesn’t work like common sense. ODbL says it
> protects the database or a substantial extract of it. Where’s the data from
> OSM in this dataset?
> >
> > Cheers Martin
>
> >> On 14. Nov 2019, at 23:25, stevea <steveaOSM at softworkers.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> But if you DO use that "OSM over-layer," then please:  agree with
> common sense that those work are derived from OSM, even if they do not
> contain OSM data in them.  They contain data "helped" by OSM data, so they
> are derived (I would argue).
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20191114/051920a4/attachment-0001.html>