On 02/11/12 18:52, Igor Brejc wrote:
Hi Jonathan,
I'm looking at the Case 2 (publish something based on OSM and nothing
else). I think we need a clarification on what the "unmodified OSM
database" means. For example: it's a common practice to simplify the
line and polygon artwork when producing SVGs or PDFs (to reduce the
file size and make it easier for low-powered mobile devices to render
the artwork). This simplification is done algorithmically, without any
external data. This is just one example.
If there's no consensus on whether this constitutes an unmodified or a
derivative database, then this should also be stated on the page.
Igor
On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 4:43 PM, Jonathan Harley <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Goal-oriented wiki page, first draft:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/License/Use_Cases
Some points deliberately simplified for readability. C&C welcome.
Hi Igor, good point.
My first thought is that if the simplification adds nothing to the data,
then there is nothing that being added that we could claim ought to be
shared back to the community, so it should count as unmodified.
Michael's reply to you about the "trivial transformation guideline" of
30 October agrees with this - in his terms it provides no new "physical
observations" and the intent of the license is to capture those for
share-alike, not to extend share-alike to any technique used for storing
or transmitting the data.
Anyone disagree?
What are the other examples you had in mind? Real-world examples are
exactly what we need for this.
J.
--
Dr Jonathan Harley : Managing Director : SpiffyMap Ltd
[email protected] Phone: 0845 313 8457 www.spiffymap.com
The Venture Centre, Sir William Lyons Road, Coventry CV4 7EZ, UK
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
