You’d be mixing an ODbL database (new OSM) with a CC BY-SA database (old OSM).
You’d have to publish the database as ODbL if you were distributing the
resulting tiles.
If you didn’t publish the work and just used it yourself you’d likely be fine,
but a layer you can’t distribute isn’t really worth it.
From: Martijn van Exel [mailto:m...@rtijn.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 1:56 PM
To: Mike N
Cc: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org; talk...@openstreetmap.org
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Talk-us] New version of US redaction map
Hi
On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 9:21 PM, Mike N nice...@att.net wrote:
On 8/13/2012 11:11 PM, Paul Norman wrote:
It’s all CC BY-SA right now so you’d be okay now, but I think it’d be a
problem in the future under both CC BY-SA and ODbL if you were mix the
data in this way.
I'd think this is not actually importing any information directly from the
redacted copyrighted CC BY-SA data: it's just using it to set or clear a flag.
Much as if you were heading out to do a survey, printed Google navigation
directions, and found that the Google directions are wrong when you get there -
you'd conclude Mismatch, but still rely only on survey and approved sources
to create OSM data.
I would still be using data that is not ODbL licensed together with data that
is ODbL licensed to create the layer. How that layer is being used by mappers
to focus their remapping efforts is not in question here I think - the data is
not directly used to create new OSM data. Anyway, I should probably ask over at
legal-talk.
Martijn
--
martijn van exel
http://oegeo.wordpress.com
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
