On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:16 AM Lars-Daniel Weber <lars-daniel.we...@gmx.de> wrote:
> From: "Kathleen Lu via legal-talk" <legal-talk@openstreetmap.org> > > In my view, if you are keeping the two zip codes in different columns > > and not removing duplicates, then essentially what you have is one > > property that is "OSM ZIP" and one property that is "proprietary ZIP", > > and they are two different properties that are not used to improve each > > other, so it is a collective database per > > > https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Collective_Database_Guideline_Guideline > > Okay, thanks for clarification. Then the specific column is under ODbL and > the other columns can be proprietary. > But I need to tell others, not to compare both ZIPs datasets and get "the > best of both worlds", right? > > Exactly > > (However, I am doubtful that the ZIPs would be considered > > nonsubstantial, since that definition is not based on how many columns > > of OSM is used.) > > Ah okay, there's the 100 features directive in OSM, which I didn't know > about. > > The 100 features is *one way* (that is relatively easy to understand) but not the only way for an extraction to be insubstantial. However, that said, I would be doubtful that, for example, an extraction of all ZIPs in OSM could be insubstantial. Where the line is has not been conclusively established.
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk