12 Dec 2019, 23:40 by legal-talk@openstreetmap.org: > No, ODbL does not apply to any database that does not include OSM data.
It is true but misleading to mention here as this database contains transformed OSM data. > Can I use OSM data and OpenStreetMap-derived maps to verify my own data without triggering share-alike? Mentioning this here is extremely misleading. > If something is both on your list and within the OSM boundary, then you say > 'yes, this goes on the secondary list.' Then you want to publish your secondary list. Note "you should be able to reasonably demonstrate that any such change was made either from your own physical observation or comes from a non-OpenStreetMap source accessed directly by you. I.e you can compare but not take!" Note "you should visit the street and check the name, then you are free to put that name in your data as it is your own observation." You are allowed to use this "secondary list" only and solely to pinpoint data that is likely to be wrong and requires verification. List itself is OSM derived and ODBL apply. > There is no OSM data in the secondary list so it is not a Derivative Database. This is blatantly untrue. There is OSM data there, only transformed. 12 Dec 2019, 23:40 by legal-talk@openstreetmap.org: > No, ODbL does not apply to any database that does not include OSM data. There > are two reasons. > > First, this example is analogous to the FAQ here: > > https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Licence_and_Legal_FAQ#Can_I_use_OSM_data_and_OpenStreetMap-derived_maps_to_verify_my_own_data_without_triggering_share-alike.3F > Can I use OSM data and OpenStreetMap-derived maps to verify my own data > without triggering share-alike? > > Yes, provided that you are only comparing and do not copy any OpenStreetMap > data. If you make any changes to your data after making the comparison, you > should be able to reasonably demonstrate that any such change was made either > from your own physical observation or comes from a non-OpenStreetMap source > accessed directly by you. I.e you can compare but not take! > > Example 1: You notice that a street is called one name on your map and > another in OpenStreetMap. You should visit the street and check the name, > then you are free to put that name in your data as it is your own observation. > Example 2: You notice that a boundary is different in your data and > OpenStreetMap. You should check back to original authoritative sources and > make any correction required. > > When someone does example #1 above, they compare OSM data and nonOSM data and > make a list of streets to check in the real world. Neither the nonOSM data > nor the list of streets needs to be licensed under ODbL. You may *compare* > freely. > If I understand your usecase correctly, Matthais, you are essentially > checking your list against OSM boundaries. If something is both on your list > and within the OSM boundary, then you say 'yes, this goes on the secondary > list.' Then you want to publish your secondary list. There is no OSM data in > the secondary list so it is not a Derivative Database. > > Second, see the Geocoding Guidelines, which Martin also pointed out - > > https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Geocoding_-_Guideline#The_Guideline> > > Your example is akin to using OSM polygons for certain areas to geocode. You > already have the lat/long for your points (houses and flats), so what you are > getting from OSM is equivalent to the name of the area you are filtering > against (e.g., all these points are in neighborhood X). > The Geocoding Guidelines specifically state "if only names are provided in > Geocoding Results from OSM -- in particular, latitude/longitude information > from OSM is not included in the Geocoding Results -- > a collection of such > results is not a substantial extract> ." > Thus, no ODbL obligations attach. > > -Kathleen > > > > > > > On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 11:55 AM Nuno Caldeira <> > nunocapelocalde...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> does contain derivate however,which means license applies >> >> On Thu, 12 Dec 2019, 19:46 , <>> matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de>> > wrote: >> >>> > we are here to create more open data, not to feed proprietary data than >>> > is lock under their TOS. >>> >>> I want to apologize for my misunderstanding: my final product does not >>> contain any OpenStreetMap data. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> legal-talk mailing list >>> >>> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org >>> >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> legal-talk mailing list >> >> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org >> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >>
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
