Hi,
How long time ODbL will protect the data? The EU database directive "Directive
96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the
legal protection of databases" gives 15 years protection
"Article 10
Term of protection
1. The right provided for in Article 7 shall
El Martes, 29 de Septiembre de 2009, Jukka Rahkonen escribió:
> How long time ODbL will protect the data? The EU database directive
> "Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11
> March 1996 on the legal protection of databases" gives 15 years protection
The thing to un
On 9/29/09, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Iván Sánchez Ortega wrote:
>> The same goes with the ODbL. Once you make a planet dump and let 15 years
>> pass, you can not assert any rights over the dump... so you can not assert
>>
>> the ODbL. Simple as that.
>
> Question is: 1. what about the contents thems
Matt,
Matt Amos wrote:
>> And 2. you are wrong because ODBL tries exactly that, to assert rights
>> over the collection even in jurisdictions where there are none, by
>> invoking the idea of a contract - so where is it written that the
>> contract, which may well exist in parallel to sui generis
Hi,
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> So *either* it's free-for-all after 15 years in Europe but then it is
> also free-for-all after 1 day in the US.
... *or* the contractual component is still valid in Europe even after
the sui generes protection expires, which validates the OP's question.
Bye
Frederik
Matt Amos writes:
>>Have we reached a
>>consensus that the contents of the database are themselves not protected
>>by copyright and do we explicitly say that we don't claim any copyright?
>
>yes. see the contributor terms document.
I think what might have been meant is not 'does the OSM foundati
On 30/09/2009, at 7:36 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Question is: 1. what about the contents themselves. Have we reached a
> consensus that the contents of the database are themselves not
> protected
> by copyright and do we explicitly say that we don't claim any
> copyright?
I don't think that a
Hi,
James Livingston wrote:
> On 30/09/2009, at 7:36 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>> Question is: 1. what about the contents themselves. Have we reached a
>> consensus that the contents of the database are themselves not
>> protected
>> by copyright and do we explicitly say that we don't claim any
Frederik Ramm wrote:
> For example if OSM user "n80" artfully crafts a way that doesn't
> even exist and uploads it to OSM, then that way would perhaps
> be protected by copyright in some jurisdictions, completely
> independent of the database and whether or not it is substantial.
I think we n
On Wed, Sep 30, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Matt Amos wrote:
>>> And 2. you are wrong because ODBL tries exactly that, to assert rights
>>> over the collection even in jurisdictions where there are none, by
>>> invoking the idea of a contract - so where is it written that the
>>> con
Hi,
Jukka Rahkonen wrote:
> Was the answer to my question that nobody knows how long ODbL is protecting
> the
> data and it is impossible to tell it exactly?
No, I think the answer was "forever".
Bye
Frederik
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@op
11 matches
Mail list logo
