On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Anthony <o...@inbox.org> wrote: > I see you're talking about the US. So I'll provide a case for you. Key > Publications, Inc. v. Chinatown Today Publishing Enterprises Inc. held that > the yellow pages of the phone directory were copyrightable. Surely the OSM > database offers "the de minimis thought needed to withstand the originality > requirement". It doesn't take very much. >
Let me add that I'm of the opinion that it's likely a "thin copyright". If you want to extract all the libraries in the OSM database and import them into your proprietary database, I doubt there's going to be any way to stop you, whether OSM is under CC-BY-SA, ODbL, or anything else (*). But for wholesale copying of the entire database, I think you'd have a really hard time arguing that there's absolutely no originality at all. (*) Incidentally, that's probably what I'll probably wind up doing if OSM goes ODbL - I'll extract particular specific features that I find most interesting/useful and ignore the ODbL, which won't apply since I've never agreed to it. On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 12:44 PM, Rob Myers <r...@robmyers.org> wrote: > Do you have a write-up of your opinion of the ODbL's enforceability > anywhere (I'm sorry if I've missed this before)? I believe it has been discussed on this list, by a member of CC, who basically threatened to upload the OSM database to a P2P filesharing service with no license if OSM goes with ODbL. Basically, to the extent the data isn't copyrightable (and in jurisdictions where database rights are not recognized), ODbL is just as enforceable as CC-BY-SA. It tries to add contract restrictions on people, but a contract isn't binding on people who don't agree to the contract.
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
