> As for OSM ID number, this falls under the so-called "Fairhurst Doctrine" > and would not be considered "Substantial" under ODbL if and only if the > community agrees and the OSMF endorses.
At the risk of splitting hairs, I don't think the community/OSMF's sense of the "substantial" threshold is relevant in this case, as OSM IDs don't appear to be eligible for U.S. copyright protection or 96/9/EC database rights. In particular, from the latter: > 6.5 - The performance by the lawful user of a database or of a copy thereof > of any of the acts listed in Article 5 which is necessary for the purposes of > access to the contents of the databases and normal use of the contents by the > lawful user shall not require the authorization of the author of the database. > 8.1 - The maker of a database which is made available to the public in > whatever manner may not prevent a lawful user of the database from extracting > and/or re-utilizing insubstantial parts of its contents, evaluated > qualitatively and/or quantitatively, for any purposes whatsoever. Where the > lawful user is authorized to extract and/or re-utilize only part of the > database, this paragraph shall apply only to that part. There is a threshold in 8.1 related to what is and isn't "substantial" but it's at the discretion of the court, if I understand correctly. But more to the point: if you allow that Wikidata's use of OSM is lawful, 6.5 seems to specifically allow for reproduction of IDs.
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
