On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 9:11 AM, David Groom <revi...@pacific-rim.net> wrote: > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Fairhurst" > <rich...@systemed.net> > To: <talk-au@openstreetmap.org> > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 2:00 PM > Subject: Re: [talk-au] Going separate ways > > >> >> David Groom wrote: >>> >>> Are you sure? ODbL defines '"Collective Database" Means this Database >>> in unmodified form as part of a collection of independent >>> databases ......'. Therefore if you "cut out" Australia it cant be part >>> of a collective database, because it is not the whole database in an >>> unmodified form. >> >> I am sure, yes. >> >> You would be making planet-combined.osm out of two databases: >> osm-without-australia.osm (ODbL) and fosm-australia-only.osm (CC-BY-SA). >> >> As it happens, osm-without-australia.osm is a Derivative Database of >> planet.osm, and fosm-australia-only.osm is a Derivative Work of >> planet.fosm. >> But that's immaterial - planet.osm is probably a Derivative of some other >> databases, too. It being a Derivative doesn't restrict your rights under >> ODbL. Once you have the Derivative Database, you are free to use it under >> the full provisions of ODbL, and that includes doing whatever you like >> with >> an "unmodified" version of it. >> > > Which seems to me to that you are agreeing with my point, that these are > derivative databases, not collective databases as you first argued.
osm-without-australia.osm and fosm-australia-only.osm are not derivatives of each other (*), but planet-combined.osm is a derivative of both osm-without-australia.osm and fosm-australia-only.osm. (*) Although in this case they are both derived from planet-110706.osm. But pretending that OSMF starts OSM over from scratch to come up with osm-without-australia.osm. _______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
