Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

Am 13.03.2016 um 16:33 schrieb Tobias Wendorff: > Am So, 13.03.2016, 16:06 schrieb Simon Poole: > >> It does (care about a change to the OSM layer). It addresses exactly the >> case that you could use your 3rd party data to generate an OSM extract >> that doesn't contain your data, generating a

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

Am So, 13.03.2016, 16:49 schrieb Simon Poole: > > I wrote the opposite. Is my English that bad? Perhaps you can read German, perhaps anyone else can. That's what my brain has translated from your writing: "Es behandelt genau den Fall, dass du deine Fremddaten zur Generierung eines OSM-Ausschnitt

[OSM-legal-talk] licenses suitable for import

Dear list, could you please recommend me licenses for releasing data to ODbL? From my point of view, compatible licenses are CC-license without "SA" and "BY" and (only if possible) CC0 and PD or finally special license, like the following one: Some crporations like "Deutsche Bahn" (the biggest

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

Am 13.03.2016 um 14:36 schrieb Tobias Wendorff: > Am So, 13.03.2016, 14:06 schrieb Simon Poole: >> I specifically limited my point to the case in which there was no >> changes to the OSM layer due to the 3rd party layer and vice versa. > Yeah, I've understood this point, but the guideline

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

Am So, 13.03.2016, 16:06 schrieb Simon Poole: > It does (care about a change to the OSM layer). It addresses exactly the > case that you could use your 3rd party data to generate an OSM extract > that doesn't contain your data, generating a complement to your data > allowing you to improve your

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

Am 13.03.2016 um 19:31 schrieb Tobias Wendorff: > Am So, 13.03.2016, 16:49 schrieb Simon Poole: >> I wrote the opposite. > Is my English that bad? Perhaps you can read German, perhaps anyone > else can. That's what my brain has translated from your writing: > > "Es behandelt genau den Fall, dass

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

sent from a phone > Am 13.03.2016 um 13:11 schrieb Tobias Wendorff > : > > This would mean: If I show parking facilities for bikes as an GPX or > GeoJSON overlay as a layer an top of the OpenStreetMap base tiles, > which might already included existing

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

Am So, 13.03.2016, 13:23 schrieb Simon Poole: > > IMHO if you don't undertake any efforts to suppress duplicate objects > (which would include purely visual operations too) you already have > completely separate datasets and are already clearly in, potentially > ugly though, Collective Database

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

Am So, 13.03.2016, 13:27 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > > yes, you won't have to release your data if you remove similar data from > OSM before rendering though. So this means: layers with data under a properity license including features, which already appear partially on a the official

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

Am So, 13.03.2016, 13:18 schrieb Simon Poole: > > http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines/Produced_Work_-_Guideline > > Which covers what Christoph has already pointed out, I'm not sure why we > would want to differentiate between maps and other produced works as you >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

Am 13.03.2016 um 13:35 schrieb Tobias Wendorff: > but of course it interacts with the features. How? signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

Am So, 13.03.2016, 13:24 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > > what other things besides maps can be produced from our db? Not many (yes, > you. could make "lists", but they're DBs as well). In the end, something > like a carpet or a tshirt or a bag are just objects to apply a map on. > FWIW, our

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

Am So, 13.03.2016, 13:50 schrieb Simon Poole: > > Am 13.03.2016 um 13:35 schrieb Tobias Wendorff: >> but of course it interacts with the features. > How? That's exactly written in here: http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines/Horizontal_Map_Layers_-_Guideline "For

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

Ahem, this is going around in circles. I specifically limited my point to the case in which there was no changes to the OSM layer due to the 3rd party layer and vice versa. In other words: there is no interaction between the layers other than they are visually superimposed. Simon Am 13.03.2016

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

sent from a phone > Am 13.03.2016 um 13:47 schrieb Tobias Wendorff > : > > "If the published result of your project is intended for the extraction > of the original data, then it is a database and not a Produced Work." shouldn't this go further and include

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

Am So, 13.03.2016, 14:06 schrieb Simon Poole: > > I specifically limited my point to the case in which there was no > changes to the OSM layer due to the 3rd party layer and vice versa. Yeah, I've understood this point, but the guideline doesn't care about a change to the OSM layer! The layer

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

Am So, 13.03.2016, 12:39 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > > I believe it has always been clear that the information stored in a map > was a kind of database by arrangement and selection, e.g. you can't take a > OSM based printed map that was released under cc0 and derive the contained > information

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

IMHO if you don't undertake any efforts to suppress duplicate objects (which would include purely visual operations too) you already have completely separate datasets and are already clearly in, potentially ugly though, Collective Database territory. Simon Am 13.03.2016 um 13:11 schrieb Tobias

[OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

Hi there, I don't know, if this thematic has already been discussed on this list, but European Court of Justice (ECJ) has confirmed the classification as a database for (printed) topographic maps (see EuZW 2015, 955). Yet the commentaries can't foresee the consequences, but publishers are happy

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

On Sunday 13 March 2016, Tobias Wendorff wrote: > > I don't know, if this thematic has already been discussed on this > list, but European Court of Justice (ECJ) has confirmed the > classification as a database for (printed) topographic maps (see EuZW > 2015, 955). Yet the commentaries can't

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

Hi Christoph, Am So, 13.03.2016, 12:18 schrieb Christoph Hormann: > On Sunday 13 March 2016, Tobias Wendorff wrote: > > I don't think there has ever been any serious doubt that printed maps > can be databases. What? There has been a lot of discussions about this in the last years. Do you have

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

sent from a phone > Am 13.03.2016 um 11:39 schrieb Tobias Wendorff > : > > There needs to be a revision of the ODbL to cleary state, what's a > printed map. From the legal site, it's not a "produced work" by the > old meaning anymore. I believe it has always

[OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

Hi there, according the the Community Guidelines for Horizontal Map Layers, feature overlays have to be released unter ODbL, if they're completing content on an online map. Quote from http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines/Horizontal_Map_Layers_-_Guideline "For example,

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

Am 13.03.2016 um 12:35 schrieb Tobias Wendorff: > I totally understand your expaination and I often used the same words > to describe ODbL. But the OSMF should release a notification to clearly > state the difference between other produced works (like artwork based > on OpenStreetMap) and

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

sent from a phone > Am 13.03.2016 um 13:01 schrieb Tobias Wendorff > : > > I'm seeing a problem in the formulation: it might be not correct to call > a map a "produced work" anymore. what other things besides maps can be produced from our db? Not many (yes,