On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 5:20 PM, Russ Nelson <r...@cloudmade.com> wrote: > I think that the reason that the US only protects creativity and not facts > is because the US doesn't want to give out a monopoly on a set of facts > about the world. I'm unfamiliar with how "sweat-of-the-brow" works. Does > it actually give a monopoly on a listing of facts? For example, in the US, > you could make a listing of every postcode, and your only claim to > copyrightability would be any judgement your exercised on which postcodes > you listed and which you chose to not list. It seems like in the UK, you > could do the same thing and have a copyright on it -- but another person > could exercize the same brow-sweating and claim a copyright on EXACTLY the > same facts. Which then brings up the interesting possibility of a third > party infringing two copyrights.
Whether you infringe on copyright depends on where you copied it from. If you copied from both datasets then quite possibly you infringe both. If you don't copy form someone else then there's no problem. It's the means that matter, not the results. Have a nice day, -- Martijn van Oosterhout <klep...@gmail.com> http://svana.org/kleptog/ _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
