There are other writings about ODBL, but this one captures the issues fairly well: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ODbL_comments_from_Creative_Commons , a more in depth treatment can be found in ' Safe to be Open: Study on the protection of research data and recommendation for access and usage ': https://www.fosteropenscience.eu/sites/default/files/pdf/835.pdf
Whether it is government, commercial interest or academic researchers, IMHO it is almost inevitable that 'mixing' will occur as information flows downstream and back upstream among federated sources. Until somebody develops and deploys some sort of blockchain provenance that can be attached to each DB element to keep track of things through pipelines of analysis/extract transformations, despite the best intentions of data consumers, it is impossible to be ODBL compliant except in the very simplest cases, like displaying the end map (with attribution) or using exclusively ODBL data. To some extent, extremely permissive licenses ( or 'license free' like the US Federal ) allow data to easily flow into ODBL, but ironically that benefit can not be reciprocated. While the https://opendatacommons.org/ seems to be stagnant since 2010 ( last 'News' post, and the Advisory Council page links mostly go to 404 ) , in contrast the Creative Commons organization has been continually evolving and adapting. For me, the point selection via ODBL polygons creates ODBL data. Michael Patrick
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk