[odc-discuss] ODbL: Does publishing Produced Work from Derivative Database trigger Derivative Database ShareAlike?

[Matt Amos]

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:01 PM, Richard Fairhurst <richard at systemed.net> wrote:
> Rufus Pollock wrote:
>  > BTW: All seem to agree that SA does *not* apply to non-public
>> derivative DBs which are not associated with Produced Works. In my
>> understanding:
>>
>> Current v0.9 of ODbL = Option 1 (approx)
>> v0.8 of ODbL = Option 3
>>
>> I don't think it would be that difficult to either a) revert to v0.8
>> (if that is what is wanted) b) have 2 distinct license versions
>> incorporating the different approaches.
>
> Yep. My understanding is that v0.8 is by far the favoured approach. We
> can punt this out on legal-talk if you like but really, there's no-one
> at all arguing for the v0.9 version.

i prefer v0.9. here is a short explanation why: s/T-shirts/minutely tiles/.

a slightly longer explanation would be: as i understand it (and i may
be wrong) under v0.8 if i am using a Derived Database (minutely
updated postgis) to create publicly-available Produced Works
(up-to-date tiles) then i must either provide a machine-readable
database dump or a "diff" between the original database and my
Derivative Database. since a "diff" from a planet file or mysql schema
dump to postgis doesn't make any sense this appears to compel me to
provide an up-to-date database dump on request (which could be up to
each minute). to me, this seems an impractical situation.

if i have misunderstood then please set me right and accept my
apologies. if not, then what can we do about this use case? has there
been any further discussion following
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2009-March/002041.html
?

cheers,

matt