On Sat, Sep 4, 2010 at 5:13 PM, Rob Myers <r...@robmyers.org> wrote: > On 09/04/2010 03:38 PM, Anthony wrote: >> Yes, but my question was over the application of the DbCL, not the >> application of copyright law. 1 way, perhaps, is "individual >> content". 1,000 different connected ways isn't. If it were, then you >> could make substantial extracts and have them covered by DbCL. > > If we can tell that they are connected, and if they amount to a single > entity (at some level of abstraction) why should that entity not be > considered "individual"?
If all the roads in North America are connected, and they make up a single entity (the road network of North America), should that entity be considered "individual"? "The Licensor grants to You a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable copyright license to do any act that is restricted by copyright over anything within the Contents, whether in the original medium or any other." > If part of the contents of the database would otherwise be encumbered by > copyright, DB right, or whatever, the DbCL neutralises that. If it wouldn't, > it doesn't. When you don't need it, you don't need it. But when you need it, > you *really* need it. > > The DbCL creates a level playing field or baseline for the ODbL to build on. So the DbCL says you can do anything you want with anything in OSM. And then the ODbL says you can do certain things provided you meet certain conditions? _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
