On 9/22/2015 4:38 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
I'm trimming the cc list and taking this to a new thread, since it's
independent of the metadata guideline.
On 9/22/2015 4:26 PM, Alex Barth wrote:
Overall, I'd love to see us moving towards a share alike
interpretation that applies to "OSM as the map" and allows for
liberal intermingling of narrower data extracts. In plain terms: to
specifically _not_ extend the ODbL via share alike to third party
data elements intermingled with OSM data elements of the same kind.
E. g. mixing OSM and non-OSM addresses should not extend ODbL to
non-OSM addresses, mixing OSM and non-OSM POIs should not extend the
ODbL to non-OSM POIs and so forth.
Turning this around, when do you think share-alike should apply in a
geocoding context?
I realized after sending that it's more appropriate to say "when do you
think share-alike does apply", not "should apply".
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
