Am 14.06.2011 um 15:43 schrieb andrzej zaborowski:
> Hi,
>
> On 14 June 2011 15:29, Jonas Krückel <jona...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Am 14.06.2011 um 14:29 schrieb davespod:
>>
>> Well, it would be nice and we could certainly ask for it, but with CC-BY-SA
>> only the end product falls under the license and not the processed data in
>> between.
>
> Are you sure? If we manage to extract the processed data, it'll be
> derived from either the end product or OSM or both, so it needs to be
> CC-By-SA too and there's no way around it.
Yes, that's right. What I was trying to say is, that they only need to release
the end product under CC-BY-SA and don't have to _provide_ any data sets from
in between.
>
>> Once we move on to ODbL however, this will change and we will get
>> the much more interesting 'raw' data.
>
> Which we can't re-use in OSM however.
Maybe you should explain why not, because from my understanding this data would
be in an OSM compatible license because of the share-a-like aspect of ODbL [1].
>
> Someone on IRC mentioned that the situation would be clearer under
> ODbL, too, but I think this is a false positive. Additionally with
> ODbL Navigon may take the position that they made a produced work.
Yes, their POI packages maybe produced work and could be proprietary, but they
would still have to release the processed OSM data from in between, which as I
stated above might be more interesting to us.
All that is only on how I understand the license and I'm not an expert on this.
Also, I think it would be appropriate to continue this discussion on legal-talk.
-- Jonas
[1] http://www.opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/summary/
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
