2015-01-06 20:39 GMT+01:00 Paul Norman <penor...@mac.com>: > It depends. If they are not adding any data, they can simply point to the > source (planet.osm.org). > > If they are adding data, they need to provide the entire derivative > database (4.6.a) or an alteration file (4.6.b) with the new contents. Based > on my experience, I would be surprised if they had non-OSM data in a > derivative database. Far more common is to layer OSM data with other data. > > It would be nice if be-on-the-road documented their format and provided > open-source tools to use it, but this is not a legal requirement. The ODbL > is concerned with preserving the openness of the data, not of the data > format. >
If the format is encrypted (or simply not documented), how would you be able to verify that someone has not combined different data sources? Do we have to trust the publisher that they follow the ODbL provisions, or is there a way to enforce verifiability? cheers, Martin
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
