On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 1:14 PM, Tom Hughes<t...@compton.nu> wrote: > On 09/09/09 11:55, Tom Hughes wrote: >> On 09/09/09 11:46, Roy Wallace wrote: >>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Jonathan >>> Bennett<openstreet...@jonno.cix.co.uk> wrote: >>>> >>>> There's a difference between using one fact from a newspaper article, >>>> and systematically extracting data from a database to reuse in another >>>> database. >>> >>> Is there a difference between >>> 1) using one fact from a newspaper article to use in another database, and >>> 2) using one fact from a database to use in another database? >>> >>> Can you clarify exactly what that difference is why one is legal while >>> the other is not (if that is indeed what you're implying)? >> >> Because (in the EU) Database Right kicks in and prohibits "substantial >> extraction". > > I just realised that I misread your question slightly... > > The correct answer is of course that on their own there is no difference > between the two. > > The problem arises once you copy a few facts, then I copy a few, then > Fred copies a few, then Jim, then... At some point we have, between us, > copied a "substantial extract" at which point the database right kicks in.
The example of a newspaper is a bad example. You cannot copy a text writen by somebody else. This is because it is his own creation. If you write yourself an article, It is allowed to mention some parts of an other article, small extracts are allowed as long as they are not "substantial" in which case you leave the right to mention a text. It is the same about a photo. You cannot copy a photo or a part of a photo because the photo itself is a creation from the guy how took the picture. But the street sign on the photo doesn't belong to the photograph, neither the photograph cannot say "this street sign is my property now because I took a picture of it". Pieren _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
