On 2015-09-22 16:38, 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.
It's that time again! :-)
Turning this around, when do you think share-alike should apply in a
geocoding context?
As with any other context, and as described by the license, when a
substantial portion of the database is copied.
- Rob.
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
