I feel the most relevant guideline in the case of Andrew would be: https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Horizontal_Map_Layers_-_Guideline
What they do: - using some OSM data of 1 Feature Type [large water bodies] - and producing data of another Feature Type [ground elevation/displacement] - moreover the final product and Feature Type is typically NOT included in OSM data. I would argue that this is different Feature Types / Horizontal layers. I would then interpret the requirements as: Use: Attribution is required. Horizontal layers / Collective Database: Share Alike is not required. -- althio On 7 June 2018 at 09:19, Christoph Hormann <chris_horm...@gmx.de> wrote: > On Thursday 07 June 2018, Kathleen Lu wrote: >> The way I understand the use, the OSM data is used to identify areas >> that are to be discarded. Data in those areas are discarded. Thus, >> the OSM data is not kept either, and no OSM data in the final >> dataset. Thus, there is no derivative database containing OSM data. > > If that was the case there would be no need for attribution either, > right? > > The idea that you can produce a data set using both OSM and non-OSM data > in a meaningful way without there being either a collective or a > derivative database seems fundamentally at odds with the basic concept > of the ODbL. The only way this could fly from my point of view would > be if you could argue the use of OSM data is insubstantial - for which > i see no basis in either law or the Substantial Guideline: > > https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Substantial_-_Guideline > > -- > Christoph Hormann > http://www.imagico.de/ > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
