Am 12.03.20 um 16:54 schrieb Полина Новикова via legal-talk:
>
> Hello, everybody!
>
> Please deal with the issue of legal regulation of OSM data.
>
> If we collect data from your API in XML format or perhaps directly from the
> front of the API in JSON format (is there any difference in this situation?).
> The final format for displaying data is the pins of organizations in the
> custom (our) design, which we place on a third-party map, with the ability to
> do so under license. Users can find out what type of organization and what
> kind of organization, filter organizations on the map, i.e., for example,
> view only hospitals. We assume to take and reflect on the map only socially
> significant objects on the map - schools, kindergartens, sports institutions,
> hospitals and shops (a fairly small number of objects). Is this obvious
> limits to the usefulness?
>
> If we allow to use the specified data on our site, which we put on a map, and
> under the terms of the purpose is not to extract the data, but only for the
> user to see these data, i.e. the goal is to bring it to the end user as shown
> in the example with Garmin maps on the site at the link
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Produced_Work_-_Guideline
> and it says it's Produced Work. In our situation, is this also a Produced
> Work?
>
I am not sure if I understand the facts correctly. In general, however, one can
say: If you query all "amenity = hospital" for a specific region, then this is
a database extract from the OSM database for which section 4.4 of the ODbL
applies. It does not matter whether the query is made by many individual
queries or by a single large query. If you show the geographical position and
the related information of "amenity = hospital" on a map, this display is a
produced work.
It is particularly important to note that if you use information from "amenity
= hospital" from the OSM database with your own data and information about
hospitals, then you create a "derivative database". In this case, section 4.6
of the ODbL also applies. The own data are then to be released on request
(share alike)!
> And I would like to clarify about attribution. The guideline states that we
> should indicate that we are contributors and provide a link to distribution
> under the ODbL license, on the other hand, for Produced Work in clause 4.3.
> license ODbL is written a little differently and that is not consistent with
> the logic written in guidline. Based on this, the question arises whether it
> is enough that we specify that the map simply contains information from the
> OSM as indicated at the beginning of paragraph 4.3?
I agree with you that the FAQ does not properly fit the licensing terms in 4.3
of the ODbL. In particular, the descriptions in the FAQ do not do justice to
the idea behind the attribution. You can choose your own license for a produced
work, see section 4.5. b of the ODbL. A proprietary license is also possible
for the produced work. The idea behind the attribution with the specification
of the license refers to it. A proprietary license can prevent the user from
reusing the produced work. The attribution and license information for the
source should enable the user to create a comparable produced work from the
open data. For this reason, the ODbL recommends stating the name of the
database and the license in section 4.3a of the ODbL. I therefore recommend the
following information: "Data: OpenStreetMap-Contributors (Open Database
License)". In addition to the information on the data, a separate license can
be added for the produced work: "Map design: (c) [name], license XYZ.
Regards, Falk
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
