[OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

I'm trimming the cc list and taking this to a new thread, since it's independent of the metadata guideline. On 9/22/2015 4:26 PM, Alex Barth wrote: Overall, I'd love to see us moving towards a share alike interpretation that applies to "OSM as the map" and allows for liberal intermingling of n

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

On 9/22/2015 4:38 PM, Paul Norman wrote: I'm trimming the cc list and taking this to a new thread, since it's independent of the metadata guideline. On 9/22/2015 4:26 PM, Alex Barth wrote: Overall, I'd love to see us moving towards a share alike interpretation that applies to "OSM as the map"

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

On 2015-09-22 16:38, Paul Norman wrote: I'm trimming the cc list and taking this to a new thread, since it's independent of the metadata guideline. On 9/22/2015 4:26 PM, Alex Barth wrote: Overall, I'd love to see us moving towards a share alike interpretation that applies to "OSM as the map" an

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

> Turning this around, when do you think share-alike should apply in a geocoding context? I think there are two goals that a successful geocoding guidance should meet: 1. Enable greater use of OSM data for geocoding, including scenarios in which sharealike provisions must not be applied (e.g. geo

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 9:43 PM Tom Lee wrote: > If more people can run geocoding services built on OSM data, more people > will have an incentive to improve the map in order to improve their > results. I'm not merely speculating: I spend most of my time working on the > Mapbox geocoder these day

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

Hi, On 09/23/2015 04:49 AM, Randy Meech wrote: > I used the MapQuest Nominatim > service to geocode and/or reverse geocode all the global tide stations > used in the app. What would the community have me do? As a step one, and before we discuss the potential licensing consequences, would you agr

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 2:01 AM Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 09/23/2015 04:49 AM, Randy Meech wrote: > > I used the MapQuest Nominatim > > service to geocode and/or reverse geocode all the global tide stations > > used in the app. What would the community have me do? > > As a step one, and b

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

Randy, On 09/23/2015 07:18 PM, Randy Meech wrote: > 3. The database you have created is partly derived from OSM (as far as > "this address is at location lon=x, lat=y" is concerned). > > Actually I mis-spoke a bit (sorry, it was several years ago). The > lat/lngs are actually from state a

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

sent from a phone > Am 24.09.2015 um 10:00 schrieb Frederik Ramm : > > and another with exactly these coordinates and their > OSM reverse geocoding result, and that you join them when displaying, > and make the OSM result database available under ODbL on request Does he even have to? Isn't th

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

My understanding of the trivial transformation guideline is that the data in the nominatim instance would fall under it (so you are not obliged to supply somebody that asks with a dump of your nominatim database or your osm2pgsql rendering database etc etc, you can simply point to the original da

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

Hi, On 09/24/2015 10:17 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: >> and another with exactly these coordinates and their >> OSM reverse geocoding result, and that you join them when displaying, >> and make the OSM result database available under ODbL on request > > Does he even have to? Isn't this covered

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

sent from a phone > Am 24.09.2015 um 11:23 schrieb Frederik Ramm : > > > I would hesitate to apply this rule for making a selection that can not > be repeated ("select reverse geocoding results for this non-public list > of coordinates and store them in my non-public derived database"). I ha

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

Frederik Ramm writes: geocoding results seem like a produced work to me. I believe that I am decorating other open data with the results of a geocoder that contains sufficient art to make it not derived, but produced. Our usual definition of produced work doesn't look at how much art there is,

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

Hi, On 09/24/2015 06:52 PM, Stephan Knauss wrote: > If a printed map is a database A printed map is not a database for us; the German court opinion you quote has been mentioned in the run-up to the license change but it didn't convince us. A database has to consist of things "arranged in a syste

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Paul Norman wrote: > On 9/22/2015 4:26 PM, Alex Barth wrote: > >> Overall, I'd love to see us moving towards a share alike interpretation >> that applies to "OSM as the map" and allows for liberal intermingling of >> narrower data extracts. In plain terms: to spec

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

I think you are clearly illustrating why we are wary of opening the can of worms bending the definitions of the ODbL creates. So now we not only have to take the leap of faith that geo-coding creates a produced work*, we have to expand the definition of substantive to allow essentially complete c

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

On 27/09/15 22:54, Alex Barth wrote: On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Paul Norman > wrote: On 9/22/2015 4:26 PM, Alex Barth wrote: Overall, I'd love to see us moving towards a share alike interpretation that applies to "OSM as the map" and allows f

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Simon Poole wrote: > The later naturally makes the former unnecessary, so we might as well > simply propose that geo-coding creates a non-substantive extract (which has > been suggested btw in a different forum and is in discussion in the LWG). > This would work

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

> In a way I would actually support [geocoding results being considered non-substantive extracts] if geo-coding was a clearly and tightly defined process, which, as I've pointed out earlier, it isn't. Are you referring to this thread, Simon, or a larger conversation elsewhere? If the latter, I'd e

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

hi, On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 05:54:59PM -0400, Alex Barth wrote: > > Turning this around, when do you think share-alike should apply in a > > geocoding context? > > > > If you methodically use a geocoder to reverse engineer the OpenStreetMap > database, share alike would kick in. "Reverse enginee