> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:legal-talk- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Iván Sánchez Ortega > Sent: 08 October 2008 21:42 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Paid services from OSM > > El Miércoles, 8 de Octubre de 2008, Sunburned Surveyor escribió: > [...] > > You take OSM data and modify the feature geometries using data you > > collected in the field. [...] (For example: You add Road > > Speed Limit attributes to all of the road segments in the dataset). > > > > What are you required to release? > > *Nothing*. > > Please keep in mind that the ODbL (or CC-by-sa, for that matter) does not > *require* you to release anything. > > The share-alike licenses, however, control the *way* you have to release > the > data, *if* you want to release it. > >
I think we want someone who derives a better/new DB from OSM data to make that available if they use that data for publically available product. > > Just the feature geomtries? Or do you have to release all of the feature > > attributes as well? > > Just the data you make publicly available, or otherwise publicly "Use". > > For example: you display in a webpage a slippy map of your geometries, > applying colours based on the OSM speed limit tag. You'd be using a > Derivative Database of OSM data (speed limits) and your data (geometries). > And, given that you're publicly Using this DB, you'd have to release it > all > (i.e. just the data needed for a third party to replicate just what you're > displaying in the webpage). > > (In this case, you'd be publicly "Using" the derivative DB by "extracting > a > significant portion of data" and using that data to display an image in a > public webpage. > To be clear if you are only using the standard public OSM Dataset then you wouldn't have to publish any derivative dataset because there isn't one. I suspect that 99% of users of OSM data will not create Derivative Database but will use standard tools on the standard DB. > > What if you keep the road speed limits in a separate > > table in your GIS and just refernece a feature geometry ID? What if the > > original OSM data contained a tag for speed limit data, but your speed > limit > > data is more up-to-date or accurate? Do any of these things make a > > difference? > > Nope, they don't matter. The ODbL and the european database directive it > is > based upon don't care about things like RDBMS tables, fields, references, > geometries or whatever. > > While determining how much data composes the Derivative Database that > you'd be > publicly Using, I think it will be safe to assume an inclusive stance: the > Derivative Database should include things in other tables, and features, > and > referenced stuff, and even things outside of a RDBMS* that are neccesary > for > the GIS to work properly. > > Just ask yourself, "If another person would like to do the same thing I'm > doing, how much data would he need?" > > > * RDBMS is the formal name we computer guys usually call a "Database". The > legalese definition of a DB is *much* broader. > Ummm, if I have a separate pre-existing complete dataset for all speed limits in my country, or in my case all a Crown (c) DB of all the bus Stops and public transport schedule data for my country then I would want to be able to use them as part of a Collective DB. I would want to: Create a Derivative Dataset of OSM containing all of OSM except the bus stops (and publish it). This avoids overlap between the OSM part and the (c) part. Then create a Collective Database combining this published Derivative Dataset together with my official Crown (c) bus stop data and schedule data and use it but not publish it. Of course, there will always be a murky boundary between Collective and Derivative, which is why I am proposing the words 'distinct' and 'significant' to give a feel of where the boundary is. I really won't be impressed with the suggesting that because there are 200 bus stops in the UK post offices in the current OSM dataset that I can't create a collective DB combining OSM data with a (c) dataset with 350,000 validated bus stops with official names and geocodes. Is this an issue for people? I hope not. To be clear, I am talking about what I would like to see in the licence, not what is currently in it, although what I am proposing is not very different from what I believe is in it (IANAL etc). I only say that in case I have been coming across too official looking and lawyer like (however I will be talking to a lawyer soon on this matter, I just want some feedback from the OSMF before I do so which I am currently not getting, but that is another story)! > > (You might want to consult a lawyer for further details, IANAL, TINLA, etc > etc > etc) > > > Cheers, > -- > ---------------------------------- > Iván Sánchez Ortega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > MSN:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Jabber:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
