On 28.02.2013 01:17, Frederik Ramm wrote: > Just to make this one point clear: > > What you *can* do with the data is pretty clear and pretty easy.
This is not really true. At the core of the ODbL is the idea that "produced works" and "derivative databases" should be treated differently, and that distinction is difficult to make and unclear for everything that is not explicitly listed as one of the examples of a produced work. Just as one example, Matthias Meißer recently forwarded a question about the legal nature of 3D city models in the light of ODbL to this list and apparently no one was able to clarify. I believe that such ambiguous and complex distinctions go against the purpose of a free license to make it easy and safe to reuse data. You are right that there are also cases where it is clear that something is not permitted, and the problem is merely that some of us would want it to be legal instead. The original question probably falls into this category. But I still wanted to point ot that this clarity does not exist for all possible use cases. > As I said in my op*ening paragraph, the share-alike license never > prohibits you from doing something with the data; it just prohibits you > from prohibiting stuff! It also _forces_ you to prohibit stuff, by requiring ODbL for derivative databases. For example, merging some OSM data now forces you to prohibit the use of your improved database as a source for Wikidata - or for OSM if we ever change our license again. Tobias _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
