On 10/13/08, Frederik Ramm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Suppose I am a statistics wizard. I take the planet file and run it > through any number of processing steps, using a lot of my proprietary > knowledge and experience and algorithms I have created and whatnot, > to produce interesting evaluations and nice maps suggesting, for > example, what the quality of life is in certain areas or so. I offer > these maps on my web site for anyone to use. > > What part of my "internal process" I used to arrive at these maps do > I have to make public? I will most likely have created a number of > derived databases along the way, not adding factual info or > correcting OSM mistakes or so, but still I will have enriched the > data by e.g. creating all kinds of time consuming statistical > analyses on top of it. Would this database have to be published along > with my "integrated experience"? > > I'm not asking about what the current license draft says, I'm asking > what we (the community) want from the user of our data in such cases.
I wouldn't want any of it, personally. I'd be interested in it if it looked like there was data that would be useful. Going back to the newly uploaded draft [1]. Maybe it's me, maybe it's the legal speak, but where does it explicitly say that if someone creates and releases to an unsuspecting public a derived work (paper map piddled on by performance artist, say) then they have to also make available any derived database that they used to make it with? On 10/13/08, Richard Fairhurst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Am I the only one who sees the subject line and thinks of Badger > Badger Badger? Share-Alike! Share-Alike! Ooooh It's a Share-Alike... [1] http://foundation.openstreetmap.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/open_database_license_01_draft.pdf _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk