10

According to the Open Knowledge Foundation... Open Knowledge is what open data becomes when it’s useful, doable, and used. So then what does this mean? The foundation goes on to list three key points about “openness” Open data are the building blocks of open knowledge. Open knowledge is what open data becomes when it’s useful, usable and used. ...


4

You have a dataset which you wish to release under an open licence. You also wish to encourage people who write software to work with this dataset to release their software under a copyleft licence. Firstly, good for you for wanting to free your data. That said, you have a problem. The licence on software does not generally affect the licensing on the ...


4

Datasets are difficult. They pose no originality, and this is handled differently in different jurisdictions. Some jurisdictions have sui generis database rights, which are handled similarly to, but distinct from copyright. In the United States for example, databases are not under any protection at all. No license can be attached to it, because it holds ...


3

Does the Open Database License (ODbL) solve a part of your problem? If you alter or build upon our data, you may distribute the result only under the same licence. It is in use by OpenStreetMap, and a.o. ensures coverage of the world gets more granular over time.


2

There's a difference between "mere aggregation" - distributing multiple pieces of software together on the same media - and a single program that depends on multiple parts. The GNU FAQ admits that this difference is fuzzy and may depend on the interpretation of a court. Nevertheless, you can stay relatively clear from this by separating the dataset from the ...


1

Does data (e.g. in JSON) that is distributed as part of this GPLv3 software package fall under GPLv3? Yes/No/Maybe. For copyright, it does not matter if a work consists or code, data, text, images, whatever. Except that certain types of data are not subject to copyright protections. If those CANbus message formats are the original creation of the authors ...


1

I think there's still some ambiguity about how your program uses the OSM content; I'm assuming that your code reads the OSM data and renders it to produce environment images that are displayed to the player in the course of his/her playing the game. For me, that makes the OSM content input to your program, and the images part of its output. Corner cases ...


1

It is not necessarily clear how a trained model relates to the training data set. At the very least this depends very much on what exact model you are using, since some models abstract over the features in the data set, whereas other models might include verbatim samples. Even if the model abstracts over the data set, the model may carry some characteristics ...


1

So as I understand it, your question relates to the licensing of the data they make available, and not using their software in a commercial application. if that's correct, that's a licensing implosion @ https://physionet.org/faq.shtml#license. Here's I reckon the words they use there would be interpreted like this: "The software is licensed under the GNU ...


1

You don't say what the app is, exactly, nor how it uses the glossary. I'm assuming that the glossary is used as a words list, which is then served up by the app. If that is the case, then the app's GPL status has no effect on your ability to use the glossary. If this glossary is transmitted to you under terms that allow you so to use it, then you can; if ...


1

Article 7, paragraph 1 creates a right of ownership - ie personal property. That right is owned by the maker of the database. Article 7, paragraph 3 makes it clear that the right of ownership can be transferred to another person, or licensed to another person. "data" is a "copyrightable work" for the purposes of the GPL v03 (ie an open source licence), ...


1

Such a restriction would make the license non-free, because the user lacks the freedom to do whatever they wish with the program's output. Suppose that a user did want to offer a warranty or liability on the data the program output; what then? True, such a choice would only be shooting themselves in the foot, but it is a freedom that you have prohibited. ...


1

Yes, this is non-free, and it probably wouldn't work as you intend to anyway. See section 12 on https://people.debian.org/~bap/dfsg-faq.html, especially items h and m. Edit: So, let's address some of the comments. The data that is output by a program is not part of the program itself, except in rather rare cases where the program outputs its own source ...


1

I am not a Lawyer, and this is not Legal Advice. My opinion: No, using API is not derived work. The easy test to see if something is derived work is to ask yourself a question Could I have produced this exact binary of mine if I have never had any access to any part of the code (including headers) of potentially infringing sub-code, but just to ...


1

There really is no specific answer, there has not been enough (any?) case law to solidify these details. That is why you can't find consensus on the details. However, the general outline of what is intended for each license can be made. But, standard IANAL/TINLA disclaimer: I am not a Lawyer, and this is not Legal Advice. To get a legitimate legal ...


1

The OpenDefinition is a good source for this and deals specifically with data and content: The Open Definition gives full details on the requirements for ‘open’ data and content. Open data are the building blocks of open knowledge. Open knowledge is what open data becomes when it’s useful, usable and used. And they provide a list of licenses that conform ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible