On 01/11/12 04:20, James Livingston wrote: >> Turning it the another way, say you had OSM data and another database, which >> you had separately rendered to images. I'm pretty sure that you could then >> overlay one image on >> another and serve the combined one to people (provided you satisfy the >> attribution requirements for the OSM data). If on the other hand you >> combined the two databases and >> then rendered the images, you would have a Derived Database you need to >> release. > > That depends on the way you did the combination. If the second data set > remained independent of the OSM data then you would have a Collective, not > Derivative Database.
That's what I'm getting at - we're saying you need to provide the data/method if you create a derivative database but not if you create a collective database, but it's often not clear which it is. As someone who received the end Produced Work, it may not be be obvious whether you should demand the data/method, and very difficult to be certain they should. As the producer, you may not be sure either. If you are using closed-source software where you can't see the internals, or if it's open-source but you don't understand the internals, you may not be able to tell. From the point of view of someone using it, it may simply be a magic box which accepts two sets of data and emits some images, and you have no idea how it combines them internally. >> How is anyone else supposed to tell the difference? If they ask you to >> release the combined database and you replied "They were rendered separately >> and then combined, I don't have to release it", is there anything to do? > > That's a question of license enforcement, isn't it? I don't have an answer, > but in the case where people are going to break the license and lie about > doing so, it probably doesn't matter what the license says. _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
