Hello, > The currently accepted wisdom is that there exists a separate channel, > apart from copyright, in which database right persists no matter what > copyright license is used. > > This means that *if* somebody took lots and lots of CC-BY-SA-published > OSM maps and reverse-engineered them into a new database, this database > would then *automatically* fall under ODbL even if that was not > mentioned in the CC-BY-SA product. > > This may sound hardly believeable to some but it is indeed not an > uncommon concept. Imagine that I prepare an article about how Dyson's > bagless vacuum cleaners work, and upload that to Wikipedia under > CC-BY-SA. Which is totally legal. Then you download the article and you > go: "Ha! This is CC-BY-SA so no further restrictions can be added. I > will build this vacuum cleaner and flood the world with inexpensive and > eco-friendly Dupont cleaners!" - Sure enough, after a while Dyson will > come knocking and sue you for infringement of their patent.
As you said it, _their patent_. Do you state that ODbL license is equal to a patent when it comes to protect the data (apart from being 'free and open')? I think you need a better example to break the "hardly believeable" spell. Sincerely, Tadeusz Knapik _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk