[OSM-legal-talk] Licensing of works containing geocodes pinpointed on OSM data

2012-10-16 Thread Jani Patokallio
Greetings,

My company is currently considering using OSM maps for pinpointing
(geocoding) our own data, and then commercially selling a) printed
maps produced with these pinpoints, and b) digital feeds incorporating
these geocodes.  These pinpoints would form a small part of a large
database of otherwise fully copyrighted data.  I've read through the
license and this:

  
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Use_Cases#Use_Cases_regarding_the_extraction_of_data_from_OSM_for_various_purposes
  
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Use_Cases#Map_composite_from_OSM_and_commercial_data

My understanding is that data created by pinpointing on OSM maps is
also covered by ODBL, this use most likely qualifies as Substantial,
and the resulting works will be made Public.  Hence:

a) The printed maps would be Produced Works.  Any work containing them
has to be tagged with an ODBL notice, and we'd have to provide the
OSM-derived geocodes used on each map -- but nothing else? -- on
request.

b) The digital feeds would be Derivative Databases and need to be
tagged as containing ODBL data.  However, does the inclusion of some
OSM-derived geocodes mean that the *entire thing* is now licensed
under ODBL, and once sold could be legally redistributed in entirety
by the customer?  Or can we constrain the ODBL data to those geocodes
alone?

Any advice would be appreciated, as I still have a faint flicker of
hope that we can get this past the corporate legal team and possibly
even contribute back to OSM!

Cheers,
-jani

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk


Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licensing of works containing geocodes pinpointed on OSM data

2012-10-16 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Jani Patokallio wrote:
 Any advice would be appreciated, as I still have a faint flicker 
 of hope that we can get this past the corporate legal team 
 and possibly even contribute back to OSM!

On this specific issue: I'd suggest you consider whether your combination of
OSM-derived data and other data is a Derivative Database (has to be shared)
or a Collective Database (doesn't have to be shared). As a rough guideilne,
we say that it's Derivative if you've adapted the two datasets to work with
each other, Collective if you haven't.

On the broader issue: I'd be interested to see a discussion as to how we
should define 'Substantial', and 'Collective' vs 'Derivative', for geocoding
(in terms of principles). I think it's reasonably uncontroversial to say
that geocoding an unsystematic set of self-collected points is a less
substantial use of OSM data than distributing the roads as part of a
connected dataset. But I've not got much further in my thinking than that. I
may go and hunt for some relevant case law (*shudders at thought of William
Hill vs BHB*)...

cheers
Richard





--
View this message in context: 
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-Licensing-of-works-containing-geocodes-pinpointed-on-OSM-data-tp5730883p5730991.html
Sent from the Legal Talk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk


Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licensing of works containing geocodes pinpointed on OSM data (Richard Fairhurst)

2012-10-16 Thread Jani Patokallio
On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 6:49 AM,  legal-talk-requ...@openstreetmap.org wrote:
 From: Richard Fairhurst rich...@systemed.net
 On this specific issue: I'd suggest you consider whether your combination of
 OSM-derived data and other data is a Derivative Database (has to be shared)
 or a Collective Database (doesn't have to be shared). As a rough guideilne,
 we say that it's Derivative if you've adapted the two datasets to work with
 each other, Collective if you haven't.

Thank you for the response.  For the feed, basically we'd be looking
at a list of points of interest in this format:

poi
  PROPRIETARY DATA
  PROPRIETARY DATA
  PROPRIETARY DATA
  location
latOSM/lat
longOSM/long
  /location
/poi

Would this be adapted or not?  If yes, what if we store the geocodes
in a separate file and cross-reference the two, like this?

Closed:
poi
  PROPRIETARY DATA
  PROPRIETARY DATA
  PROPRIETARY DATA
  location1/location
/poi

ODBL:
geocodes
  location id=1
latOSM/lat
longOSM/long
  /location
/geocodes

 On the broader issue: I'd be interested to see a discussion as to how we
 should define 'Substantial', and 'Collective' vs 'Derivative', for geocoding
 (in terms of principles). I think it's reasonably uncontroversial to say
 that geocoding an unsystematic set of self-collected points is a less
 substantial use of OSM data than distributing the roads as part of a
 connected dataset. But I've not got much further in my thinking than that. I
 may go and hunt for some relevant case law (*shudders at thought of William
 Hill vs BHB*)...

Yes, this would be very interesting for us as well.

Cheers,
-jani

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk