Just to be clear: you asked a question on an unmoderated, publicly accessible mailing list on which everybody can voice their opinions however unfounded they are or not, and now you are unhappy with that you got a cacophony of conflicting opinions, which is exactly what you should have expected.
The official guidance on geo-coding from the OSMF can be found here https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Geocoding_-_Guideline Simon Am 16.12.2019 um 03:18 schrieb matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de: >> Von: "Christoph Hormann" <chris_horm...@gmx.de> >> >> The idea that your process of intersecting non-OSM data with OSM based >> admin polygons results in a collective database is not realistic. To >> me this kind of operation would be a textbook example of something >> generating a derivative database - you combine OSM data with non-OSM >> data to generate something of additional value compared to either of >> these data sets alone. This is exactly the kind of scenario >> share-alike is meant for and why it was chosen as license for OSM. But >> there are of course fairly strong economic interests for this not being >> subject to share-alike so people think of ways to interpret the ODbL >> accordingly. > Okay, I'll canceld all plans to use OpenStreetMap for this task. > I've contacted several commercial data providers and hope to get offers > tomorrow. > > I didn't expected OpenStreetMap to be such non-free and permissive :-( > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
