On Friday 22 July 2016, Ilya Zverev wrote:
>
> Wait that doesn't seem right. You cannot violate guidelines because
> they are examples and explanations, not restrictions or a law. And
> then, when the guidelines say a dataset "may be" considered
> derivative, it doesn't say it is derivative (or oth
Hi Stefan, and thanks for writing to this mailing list.
Your case is not much different from geocoding, when you borrow some attributes
(addresses, or in your case, POI or landuse tags) from OSM and put it into a
proprietary database. That would clearly make a derived database out of your
propr
Sorry I'm not commenting everything, but just the parts I find important. (See
below)
> 22 июля 2016 г., в 1:35, Christoph Hormann написал(а):
>
> But neither does it become collective. And if you re-read my last
> mail - i clearly made the argument based on the license itself that it
> woul
sent from a phone
> Il giorno 22 lug 2016, alle ore 14:46, Stefan Jäger ha
> scritto:
>
> My question now is: if we enrich our data (with only underlying attributes,
> no geometry from OSM at all) with such a process using OSM data, is this then
> a produced work (or a collective database)
Johan C wrote:
> It's quite simple: as long as MAPS.ME operates in either the white or
> the grey area of the license it's perfectly fine what they are doing.
Um, no, that's precisely what "grey area" _doesn't_ mean.
Richard
--
View this message in context:
http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/OSM
Thanks fort he quick answer,
Actually I did consult the mentioned guideline , however, I could not really
relate it 100% to my use case.
That's what I hope for some clarification here.
Stefan
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
ht
On Friday 22 July 2016, Stefan Jäger wrote:
> [...]
>
> I have read the text here:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Horizontal_Laye
>rs_-_Guideline in particular the last paragraph "Combining OSM data
> with proprietary data?" ...
The Horizontal Layers guideline is about pro
It's quite simple: as long as MAPS.ME operates in either the white or the
grey area of the license it's perfectly fine what they are doing.
Op 22 jul. 2016 12:04 p.m. schreef "Richard Fairhurst" :
> Ilya Zverev wrote:
> > Let's consider another use case. An application that shows OSM map,
> > and
Dear all from legal-talk,
We have the idea of using OSM data for an enrichment process in order to
improve the attributive information of proprietary building footprints.
Let me briefly explain, what the purpose of using OSM for our enrichment
process is.
We are developing a data product for b
Ilya Zverev wrote:
> Let's consider another use case. An application that shows OSM map,
> and on top of it shows 1 mln of user points. A users has an option to
> hide the OSM map underneath proprietary points, with a radius of 1
> km. Does in that moment when a user clickes the options, the
>
On Friday 22 July 2016, Ilya Zverev wrote:
> You are starting to derive the licensing terms from intentions, and
> not the actual process or usage. Which basically says, if the
> community accepts this way of judging: however you use our data, if
> we don't like what you do with it, you would have
On 7/22/2016 12:28 AM, Ilya Zverev wrote:
Consider a simpler experiment. I remove nodes based on an obscure algorithm. I
then publish the rest of the database and a list of removed nodes under an open
license. Do I have to open the algorithm?
The database would be a derivative database and yo
You are starting to derive the licensing terms from intentions, and not the
actual process or usage. Which basically says, if the community accepts this
way of judging: however you use our data, if we don't like what you do with it,
you would have to stop. And that is definitely not a FOSS licen
13 matches
Mail list logo
