[OSM-legal-talk] Regarding community guidelines for map layers

2014-11-04 Thread Preet 
Hi,

The community guidelines for map layers [1] states:

If there are restaurants in the OpenStreetMap layer and you add additional
restaurants in another layer, but you include only those restaurants not
present in the OpenStreetMap layer so that the restaurant layers will
complement each other, then the layers for this feature are interacting and
the restaurants added in your non-OpenStreetMap layer must be shared

I don't understand how this falls under the share alike terms of the odbl.
If I have two separate databases with restaurant feature data (say the
first is from OSM, and the second is under a non-obdl compatible license),
and I combine the two to display restaurants in an application, why would
that require me to share the second database?

Aren't two separate databases an example of collective databases?

Is the argument that selectively deciding what to show in a produced work
from a 'closed' database by comparing against an odbl licensed database
somehow imposes that the closed database must also be odbl? Or maybe that
if the type of data in two separate databases is 'close enough', they
constitute a single database?


Preet


[1] -
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines/Horizontal_Map_Layers_-_Guideline
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Regarding community guidelines for map layers

2014-11-04 Thread Frederik Ramm 
Hi,

On 11/04/2014 04:47 PM, Preet wrote:
 I don't understand how this falls under the share alike terms of the
 odbl. If I have two separate databases with restaurant feature data (say
 the first is from OSM, and the second is under a non-obdl compatible
 license), and I combine the two to display restaurants in an
 application, why would that require me to share the second database?

It doesn't require you to share the second database.

But it would also in all likelihood lead to duplicate entries where your
second database and OSM both have a certain feature.

If this is not a problem for you, or if for example your renderer simply
doesn't draw a second restaurant icon when one is already there, then
good for you. You're simply drawing two completely independent databases
on top of each other. You don't need to share your second database.

If, however, you make a *selection* from your second database, taking
only those items that are not already in OSM, then that selection (not
the whole second database) becomes a work derived from OSM - because OSM
was used as a mask to produce it.

 Is the argument that selectively deciding what to show in a produced
 work from a 'closed' database by comparing against an odbl licensed
 database somehow imposes that the closed database must also be odbl?

Not the closed database, only the selection made from the closed
database with the help of ODbL-licensed data.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09 E008°23'33

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk