On 2014-07-14 8:15 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote:
On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Alex Barth <a...@mapbox.com> wrote:
This is also how I'm reading this. Obviously the sticky point is the
definition of what's a database in this sentence: "systematically
recreate a database from the process". You can't abuse geocoding to
recreate OpenStreetMap without triggering share alike.
The definition of 'substantial' is key here, isn't it? In one of the
examples I added, the result of OSM-based geocoding actions would
potentially be stored on a client in a collection of 'favorites'
together with other favorites that may be the result of tainted
geocoding. There's really two questions here - 1) is this collection
of favorites 'substantial' and 2) does this mixed storage trigger
share alike in an of itself?
Given that any database of geocoding results is going to be clearly
based upon the Database [OpenStreetMap], and that any interesting uses
of OSM are probably going to substantial, I don't see the definition of
it mattering.
In most of the cases raised in the wiki page, there's a derivative
database of geocoding results and some other non-derivative database of
something not taken from OSM, e.g. non-OSM POIs with just an address.
You then take this collection of data sources and create a produced
work, e.g. a page showing what the user has showed.
Once you start taking actual POI information from OSM, not just
addresses, then your POI database will also be a derivative of OSM.
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
