----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Fairhurst" <rich...@systemed.net>
To: <talk-au@openstreetmap.org>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 2:49 PM
Subject: Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways
David Groom wrote:
Which seems to me to that you are agreeing with my point, that these
are derivative databases, not collective databases as you first argued.
No: one is a Derivative Database (ODbL) and the other a Derivative Work
(CC-BY-SA), but the combination of the two is a Collective Database or
Work.
But as I said earlier, the ODbL seems quite clear that you cant make a
"Collective Database" from anything other than the original database in
unmodified form. Since neither of the two individual items are the original
database in unmodified form, then I cant see how you could claim the
resulting combination is a "Collective Database" as defined by the ODbL .
Regards
David
Derivatives have to be licensed under the licence of the original.
Therefore, they have all the freedoms afforded by that licence. Therefore,
they can be incorporated into Collective Works.
I don't think this would work for most countries. You couldn't usefully
make
a Collective Work from CC-Germany and ODbL-France, for example, because
you'd want cross-border routing and that would mean the two databases are
no
longer "separate and independent". But Australia is an island, intire of
itself, so the issue doesn't arise. It doesn't even have a Channel Tunnel
to
worry about. :)
cheers
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/Going-separate-ways-tp6567842p6570979.html
Sent from the Australia mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
_______________________________________________
Talk-au mailing list
Talk-au@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
