On Jul 10, 2014, at 07:54 PM, Alex Barth <a...@mapbox.com> wrote:
I just updated the Wiki with a proposed community guideline on geocoding.
In a nutshell: geocoding with OSM data yields Produced Work, share alike does
not apply to Produced Work, other ODbL stipulations such as attribution do
apply. The goal is to remove all uncertainties around geocoding to help make
OpenStreetMap truly useful for geocoding and to drive important address and
admin polygon contributions to OpenStreetMap.
This interpretation is based on what we hear from our lawyers at Mapbox. As
this is an interpretation of the ODbL, grey areas remain and therefore, seeing
this interpretation adopted as a Community Guideline by the OSMF would be
hugely helpful to create more certainty about the consensus around geocoding
with OpenStreetMap data.
Please review:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Geocoding_-_Guideline
That a geocoding result is not a derived database is fairly obvious and not
that interesting. It was produced from a derivative database, but isn't a
database itself so can't be a derivative database.
In my reading of the definitions, a database of geocoding results is a
derivative database of the database used to power the geocoder. That database
will then frequently be part of a collective database where the other
independent databases are typically proprietary databases of some kind. That
collective database is then generally used to produce works that are a produced
work of the database of geocoding results as part of a collective database.
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
