Hi, On 07/25/2014 11:39 AM, Simon Poole wrote: > As I've said before, I'm not convinced that trying to better define and > clarify the issue by invoking the "produced work" clauses will lead to a > satisfactory result. I would suggest that at least a comparison (for all > your use cases) with a model based on "the information that is used for > geocoding is subject to share alike, but nothing else" (which has been > suggested in this discussion and previously a number of times).
I have made a start on this comparison by adding a second column to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Open_Data_License/Geocoding_-_Guideline outlining the position/results of the "stuff used for geocoding makes a derivative database but only that and not the additional info" approach. I call it the "collective database" alternative because the idea is that your proprietary data (store opening times or whatnot) form a collective database with the ODbL-Share-Alike location data. It would be great if people would help fill in the blanks, or correct me where I might have misrepresented the discussion. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
