When goes a "community guideline" change rather than explain a licence?
There are a number of "community guideline" pages on the wiki.
Some of these pages do clearly seem simply to explain how the ODbL should be
interpreted, such as "We can clearly define things that are USUALLY Produced
Works: .PNG, JPG, .PDF, SVG images" [1]
However on the Trival Transformations guideline page [2] there are some
examples which rather than explaining the interpretation of ODbL do in fact
seem to negate some of the clauses in ODbL **. Now I accept that as
presently written the Trivial Transformations guideline page seems in fact
to offer no guidelines, but merely asks a series of questions (i.e. it gives
examples to which no answers are currently given), but I assume at some
point this page will be translated into actual "guidelines".
So in essence my question is "when does a 'guideline' which seeks to exempt
something from the consequences of a the ODbL, become a change to the
licence rather than an explanation of it?"
Regards
David
[1]
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Produced_Work_-_Guideline
[2]
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Trivial_Transformations_-_Guideline
** the general thrust of a number of the examples sees to be that the
generation of extracts of the database that does not have any additional
information added to it, should not be required to adhere to clause 4.6 of
ODbL.
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
