13 Dec 2019, 19:28 by legal-talk@openstreetmap.org:
> Hi Frederik,
>
> Here's why I disagree. The meaning of "derived" in a colloquial sense and the
> definition of "Derivative Database" are not the same.
> While colloquially, it may be fair to interpret "derived" as "made from" or
> "could
Nuno -
I do not see how Matthias's usecase qualifies as "AND you have *added to or
enhanced our data*" since the houses and flat and their prices are *not*
added to OSM houses or flats, but if this FAQ answer is misleading, we
should rewrite this FAQ answer to more accurate reflect ODbL.
On Fri,
Hi Christoph,
I think that there is a premise to your list that I do not quite agree
with. ODbL says:
3.1 Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, the Licensor
grants to You a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, terminable (but
only under Section 9) license to Use the Database for
There are other writings about ODBL, but this one captures the issues
fairly well:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ODbL_comments_from_Creative_Commons , a
more in depth treatment can be found in ' Safe to be Open: Study on the
protection of research data and recommendation for access and usage
On Friday 13 December 2019, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> I had until now assumed that such works would definitely fall under
> the ODbL but you are right, they don't really fit the "Derivative
> Database" definition.
My reading of the ODbL has always been that something is either
1) the original
well
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Licence_and_Legal_FAQ#The_OpenStreetMap_Geodata_Licence
Secondly, you *"Share Alike"*. If you do not make any changes to
OpenStreetMap data, then you are unlikely to have a "Share Alike"
obligation. But, if you _publicly distribute something
sent from a phone
> On 13. Dec 2019, at 19:56, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>
> I'll have to ponder this for a while, it changes some assumptions I had
> made. It would mean that, for example, a database that contains a count
> of all pubs in each municipality,
-> adaptation
> or a database
Nuno - I think you are operating under the mistaken assumption that a
CC-BY-SA license would mean that uses such as Mattias's would require
sharealike.
Here's CC-BY-SA's definition of a Derivative Work:
*"Derivative Work"* means a work based upon the Work or upon the Work and
other pre-existing
these new Liberal interpretation of ODbL are funny. to bad it's not
documented what we wanted when we changed license. seems to be full of lies
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Historic/We_Are_Changing_The_License
*"This means that “good guys” are stopped from using our data but the
sent from a phone
> On 13. Dec 2019, at 19:32, matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de wrote:
>
> So as soon I'm selecting any data using OSM polygons, it gets transformed OSM
> data?
> They're not even touching on the same layer, since it's a different feature
> type.
if you modify your data
Hi,
On 13.12.19 19:28, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk wrote:
> “Derivative Database” – Means a database based upon the Database, and
> includes any translation, adaptation, arrangement, modification, or any
> other alteration of the Database or of a Substantial part of the
> Contents.
Interesting. I
Hi Mateusz,
>> No, ODbL does not apply to any database that does not include OSM data.
> It is true but misleading to mention here as this database contains
> transformed OSM data.
So if I don't merge the postcodes, it's fine?
>> There is no OSM data in the secondary list so it is not a
Hi Frederik,
Here's why I disagree. The meaning of "derived" in a colloquial sense and
the definition of "Derivative Database" are not the same.
While colloquially, it may be fair to interpret "derived" as "made from" or
"could not have been made without", that is not the legal definition of
Hi Lars-Daniel, yeah, same here.
I've read you tried to do similar work in the past. I think, you've merged postcodes with OSM data in a seperate column and didn't need to attribute it as share-alike.
What did you end up with?
Gesendet: Freitag, 13. Dezember 2019 um 19:25 Uhr
Von:
Please stop constructing such cases. This case clearly would have the intention of reproducing the OSM database.
My intention is the trivial use of OpenStreetMap. A normal process in the GIS world.
Gesendet: Freitag, 13. Dezember 2019 um 10:44 Uhr
Von: "Mateusz Konieczny"
An: "Licensing
13 Dec 2019, 09:48 by frede...@remote.org:
> I end up with a database of "streets that have at least one pub". This
> database does not include OSM data.
>
> In my eyes, though, it is still *derived* from OSM data. It is the
> result of an algorithmic process that has made use of OSM data; if
12 Dec 2019, 23:40 by legal-talk@openstreetmap.org:
> No, ODbL does not apply to any database that does not include OSM data.
It is true but misleading to mention here as this database contains transformed
OSM data.
> Can I use OSM data and OpenStreetMap-derived maps to verify my own data
Kathleen,
On 12.12.19 23:40, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk wrote:
> No, ODbL does not apply to any database that does not include OSM data.
Are you sure about this? Let me give an example:
> If I understand your usecase correctly, Matthais, you are essentially
> checking your list against OSM
18 matches
Mail list logo
