3 ms·
The decision for the OSM license switch was a questionable one. If you're in the US, the (federal) copyright statutes contain no sui generis provisions for dat
by carussell 10y ago
The decision for the OSM license switch was a questionable one. If you're in the US, the (federal) copyright statutes contain no sui generis provisions for databases. I.e., there is effectively on copyright protection for the kinds of things you'll be pulling from OSM, so long as you can guarantee that the data you're pulling is limited to the attributes that wouldn't meet the threshold for creativity. This includes all the boring but most useful stuff: coordinates, dimensions, building height, street layout.
This is not legal advice.
- Doctor_Fegg 10y agoThe Open Database Licence (as used by OSM) is expressly a contract as well as a copyright and database rights licence, so it applies in the US even when copyright doesn't. (I'm choosing not to pronounce here on whether applying copyleft/share-alike to geodata is a good idea...)
- icebraining 10y agoIANAL, but seems doubtful that they can enforce that contract; some servers (that the OSM project links to) don't even mention it when you download the files, let alone require an explicit mark of your agreement. Copyright is different, in the sense that in the absence of a license, the default terms in the law actually prohibit one from copying stuff, hence one can't claim ignorance.
- Doctor_Fegg 10y agoEnforceability of clickwrap is a long-disputed topic. But I think it's fair to say that anyone who intentionally disrespects the wishes of the volunteers who are providing them with the best source of free geodata in the world is a first-rate idiot.
- halomru 10y agoThat is useful in the US, but in Europe boring but useful databases are still covered by copyright.