DEVELOPMENT VERSION: This is an experimental DALICC environment. Features, data and APIs may change or be reset without notice. A stable version of this service, with a potentially different feature set, will be made available soon at dalicc.net.

2026

Compare dependency graphs

Put two dependency graphs next to each other and read what the second one states differently from the first: the axioms it adds, removes or relates another way, and the default rules it adds, drops or changes, each with its legal basis, its status and a plain explanation. Nothing shown here is legal advice.

Swap the two

DALICC deontic dependency graph, version 2, against United Kingdom default rules, version 2.

Axioms: 0 added, 0 removed, 0 changed. Default rules: 5 added, 0 removed, 0 changed.

The same comparison as JSON Through the API Dependency Graph Viewer

What the second graph adds

Default rules 5

Status
dalicc:suiGenerisDatabaseRights Extract or reuse a substantial part of a database Not granted by default United Kingdom The Copyright and Rights in Databases Regulations 1997, regulations 13 and 18, which the United Kingdom kept after leaving the Union: the maker of a database holds a right separate from copyright if the maker is a national or resident of the United Kingdom or a body formed under its law (or of the Isle of Man); since 1 January 2021 a maker from the European Economic Area alone no longer qualifies Proposed
A licence that says nothing about the database right is read as not granting it, because the maker holds that right separately from any copyright and a licence that deals only with copyright leaves it untouched. The United Kingdom kept the database right after leaving the European Union for makers who are UK nationals, residents or bodies; since 1 January 2021 a new database made by a maker from the European Economic Area alone no longer qualifies. Combining a licence that is silent about it with one that grants it shows a conflict marked as coming from this rule.
dalicc:reverseEngineerForInteroperability Reverse engineer for interoperability Granted by default United Kingdom Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 section 50B: a lawful user of a copy of a program may decompile it where that is necessary to obtain the information needed to create an independent program which can be operated with it or with another program, and not where that information is readily available to him Proposed
A licence that says nothing about decompiling a program for interoperability is read as allowing it, within the limits the statute sets: the person must be a lawful user of the program, the information must not already be readily available, and the decompiling must be necessary to create an independent program that works with it. The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act lets a lawful user decompile a program for that purpose and no other. A licence that prohibits it is not read as removing the exception; the rule gb-interop-void reports the prohibition as a finding.
dalicc:reverseEngineerForInteroperability Reverse engineer for interoperability Not waivable United Kingdom Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 section 296A: a term of an agreement is void in so far as it purports to prohibit what section 50B allows Proposed
This rule adds nothing to a licence that is silent about decompiling for interoperability; it reports a finding when a licence prohibits it. The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act makes a term of an agreement void in so far as it forbids what the decompilation exception allows. A person combining licences under this graph sees the finding beside such a prohibition, and the licence text is left as it is.
dalicc:textAndDataMining Text and data mining Granted by default United Kingdom Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 section 29A(1): a person with lawful access may make a copy for computational analysis for the sole purpose of research for a non-commercial purpose, accompanied by a sufficient acknowledgement unless that is impossible. Commercial mining is not covered Proposed
A licence that says nothing about text and data mining is read as allowing it, although section 29A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act covers only copying by a person with lawful access for computational analysis for non-commercial research, with a sufficient acknowledgement unless that is impossible. The action this graph uses does not tell research from commercial mining, so a commercial miner cannot rely on this rule and needs a licence that grants the act. Combining a licence that is silent about it with one that prohibits it shows a conflict marked as coming from this rule.
dalicc:textAndDataMining Text and data mining Not waivable United Kingdom Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 section 29A(5): a contract term purporting to prevent or restrict the making of a copy under that section is unenforceable Proposed
This rule adds nothing to a licence that is silent about mining; it reports a finding when a licence prohibits text and data mining. The Copyright, Designs and Patents Act makes a contract term unenforceable in so far as it prevents or restricts the copying the research exception allows. A person combining licences under this graph sees the finding beside such a prohibition.

What the second graph does not have

Nothing: every statement of DALICC deontic dependency graph is in United Kingdom default rules too.

What both have in a different form

Nothing: no statement is in both graphs in a different form.