Hi,
On 08/09/2012 11:54 PM, Mike Dupont wrote:
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 8:05 PM, Phil! Gold <phi...@pobox.com> wrote:
CC-BY-SA is similar
in broad terms (you must license the mixed database to the user under
CC-BY-SA), but lacks the details more specific to datasets, like the
reasonable-format requirement.
Can you provide more information on this?
I think this might be a misunderstanding.
Both CC-BY-SA and ODbL have a clause that prohibits you to use
"technological measures" to circumvent the freedoms guaranteed by the
license. This is mostly aimed at DRM and similar concepts.
For example, you could theoretically make an electronic map based on OSM
which is freely copyable but users must buy a decryption code keyed to
their software installation from you in order to be able to use it. This
is prohibited under both licenses. (Some people are of the opinion that
therefore any sale of OSM derived products through something like
Apple's AppStore is not allowed under CC-BY-SA.)
The ODbL has a clause softening that rule (4.7. b "parallel
distribution"), which essentially says that you can distribute
DRM-encumbered databases if you offer a non-DRM alternative that is "at
least as accessible as the non-restricted" version.
But neither CC-BY-SA nor ODbL clearly say what counts as "restricting"
the data. For example, in order to be usable in a routing application,
the data will likely have to be heavily preprocessed and indexed, and
various manufacturers will use their own data formats for that. The line
between "complex data format" and "encrypted data" is certainly blurry.
I think, under ODbL as well as CC-BY-SA, car navigation manufacturers
are in the following situation:
* they can make OSM datasets available for their navigation systems
* they do not have to publish their data format, or publish software
that allows users to make their own OSM-derived datasets for the
navigation system
* they must not restrict the copying of such datasets (i.e. it must be
possible for one guy to buy it and give it to another guy who has the
same navigation system to use it there)
* (ODbL special) if they do restrict copying then they must make an
un-restricted version available in parallel that is "at least as
accessible" as the restricted version, which in my opinion means that it
must be loadable into the car navigation system.
I don't know much about the automobile industry but my guess is that
they are less concerned about loss of sales due to people being allowed
to copy data; I think they are very keen on controlling precisely what
gets into their cars because they have liability paranoia.
Therefore I think neither license is an obstacle for them, because
neither forces them to open up the car navigation system to free imports
by the user.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
