sent from a phone
> On 21. Dec 2019, at 03:22, Kathleen Lu <kathleen...@mapbox.com> wrote: > > Remember that it's a "substantial part...of the contents of a database" (in > this case OSM), and one way would be a very very small part of OSM. If “substantial“ has to be seen in relation to the size of the database it would imply that the more data we collect the more one could take without it being protected. It’s hard to believe that this is the intention of the wording, but if it was confirmed we could protect by splitting the planet db in several parts, eg. by tenth of degrees, and distribute it as collection of databases rather than a single one. A single feature would be more of an exception (on average), but when you look at relations rather than ways they can become easily substantial Cheers Martin _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
