(After a hiatus - I've been discussing this off-list with Anthony and
others.)
On 22/10/12 23:13, Anthony wrote:
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer
<dieterdre...@gmail.com> wrote:
2012/10/22 Jonathan Harley <j...@spiffymap.net>:
Anyway, the ODbL is explicit that an image is an example of a produced work,
so for anyone creating them, their responsibility is clear: include the
notice required for produced works.
It's also explicit that a produced work is not a derivative database (4.5b),
so it follows that a map image does not have to be licensed using ODbL. So,
the hypothetical person wishing to publish on a stock art website only has
to decide whether they wish to impose ODbL or some other restriction on
their work, or not. Not imposing any restrictions on an image is clearly
allowed. (In which case a database derived from the image would not be bound
by ODbL.)
Then this is clearly a loophole. You could render (with a dedicated
style) the whole world in a very high zoom level (even as raster, if
you're in doubt whether vectors might fall under ODbL), apply image
recognition on it (would be simple if you used one rendered layer per
feature) and reassemble the whole database. I am simplifying this
process, but it is clearly possible.
This (both Jonathan's comment and your response) confuses copyright
law. Yes, you don't have to release a Produced Work under ODbL. But
if you don't have a license on the Produced Work, then all rights are
reserved.
Only *if* copyright is there at all. What is in question is whether a
substantial amount of material that is OSM's copyright is present in a
map I make using OSM's data. If it isn't, then it follows that OSM
cannot reserve any rights in my work, explicitly or otherwise.
To recap, OSM does not assert database rights on a produced work such as
a map image, so only copyright is in question.
One thing that's confusing me, is that
http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright does not say what license applies
to the contents. ODbL specifically says that it only applies to the
database and a separate license is required for the contents. It
suggests that a notice should be inserted "prominently in all relevant
locations" which surely includes the copyright wiki page.
I remember earlier discussions on this list about using ODcL for the
contents. Was this what was agreed on? LWG, anyone?
J.
--
Dr Jonathan Harley : Managing Director : SpiffyMap Ltd
m...@spiffymap.com Phone: 0845 313 8457 www.spiffymap.com
The Venture Centre, Sir William Lyons Road, Coventry CV4 7EZ, UK
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
