Hi, Kai Krueger wrote:
If, on the other hand, out of the black box comes a derived database, then you can simply share *that* database and nobody cares what happened in the black box, because you only have to share the last in a chain of derived databases that leads to a produced work, right?
Am I allowed to declare my png mapnik tile as a "derived database", stick an ODbL label on it an be done with it?
I've been thinking about that. It would certainly be within the legal definition of a database to call a PNG file a database. This would mean that the producer of a map tile has a choice - either declare your map tile to be ODbL, lose the ability to license your map tile differently, but not have to share any databases behind it; or choose to declare your map tile a produced work that you can license in a different way but then you have to share the database behind it.
Our community norm currently says it is a database if it was intended to extract the data... some time in the past someone said "it is a database if you say it is one". Maybe that wasn't so bad after all.
Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [email protected] ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
