On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 3:53 PM, Rob Myers <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 07/17/2010 12:30 PM, John Smith wrote: > >> On 17 July 2010 20:11, Rob Myers<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> If this is the case then given that the CC licences are copyright >>> licences >>> what would they apply to in the OSM database in Australia? >>> >> >> The court case in question was over facts, dates and times and show >> names, IceTV who instigated this case, also pays students to review >> shows, which adds an element of creativity to their database of facts. >> > > Thanks. So IceTV weren't infringing on Channel Nine's copyright as Channel > Nine didn't have one on the mere facts of their programme schedule, but > IceTV's combined and creativity-added database is above the > creativity/originality threshold required to gain copyright protection as a > (collective?) literary work? > > There has been discussion in the past about how "creative" the various > levels of OSM are (my personal opinion is raw data:not, edited and combined > ways:possibly, rendered maps:definitely). The outcome wasn't to rely on > creativity. ;-) > > What's your source for the assertion that we shouldn't rely on creativity?
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
