On 4 Mar 2009, at 10:26, Dave Stubbs wrote: > 2009/3/4 Gustav Foseid <[email protected]>: >> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 6:38 PM, David Earl <[email protected] >> > >> wrote: >>> >>> They used the map to pin the locations - the points did not come >>> from >>> some other map. Therefore it is derived (this is precisely the >>> problem >>> with pinning pictures on a Google or OSM map). So if they put the >>> data >>> in a database (= spreadsheet for example) before printing it, that >>> would >>> be derived, surely. >> >> The coordinates came from a Produced Work (some map image og paper >> map). As >> I read the license, works (or databases) based on a Produced Work >> is not >> subject to the conditions of the ODbL. > > > If you were able to extract coordinates then this could be regarded as > reverse engineering the Produced Work, in which case it's covered by > 4.7 > There's that "substantial" caveat again though.
Very unlikely, derived individual coordinates are facts. I've asked multiple lawyers about this personally. Best Steve _______________________________________________ talk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
