Hi Paul Has anybody from the TR community tried to get permission from HGK (with a pointer that the data is freely available elsewhere and that removing it would add up to deleting and re-adding exactly the same data)? Having such permission would seem to be the best solution right now.
2nd question why would somebody re add the HGK data if the same data is available from a different agency? Potentially the solution would be to redact and add the OK data at the same time. Simon Am 29.04.2013 05:31, schrieb Paul Norman: > A user in Turkey brought in about 30k place nodes (or mountain peak nodes) > from HGK, a Turkish government agency. > > HGK prohibits actions besides personal use[1] and this is clearly > incompatible with the ODbL. As I indicated, this means they need to be > removed,[2] which in technical terms means redacting them. Identifying the > material to be redacted will not be easy. > > A couple of people have indicated that there may be other sources available > which have village locations. Unfortunately, this does not change the status > of the HGK data. It is an odd situation where the data is not available > under an open license from one agency, but the exact same data is openly > licensed from another agency. > > == Questions == > > LWG: My understanding is we need permission or a suitable license from the > data source and that finding an alternate source would only allow us to > bring in the new data, not keep the old data. Is this correct? > > LWG+DWG: If someone re-uploads the HGK data because they disagree with the > redaction, they will of intentionally and knowingly uploaded copyrighted > material without permission or a license. Does the DMCA oblige us to do > something about this? If they do this, should we do something even if we > aren't required to under the DMCA? > > [1]: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-tr/2013-April/000291.html > as well as a Bing translation of their FAQ > > [2]: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-tr/2013-April/000293.html > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Norman [mailto:penor...@mac.com] > Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2013 8:15 PM > To: 'Suha Ulgen' > Cc: 'OSM Mikel Maron'; 'Schuyler Erle'; 'Mikel Maron'; 'Kate Chapman' > Subject: RE: OSM place name data from Turkey > >> From: Suha Ulgen [mailto:m...@suhaulgen.com] >> Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2013 7:56 PM >> Subject: OSM place name data from Turkey >> >> Paul, >> >> The Turkish OSM community is very distressed about your recent >> unilateral action. Apparently you are erasing the place names in the >> Turkish dataset stating that the source data which you identify as >> belonging to the Turkish General Command for Mapping (Harita Genel >> Komutanligi - HGK) is not ODbL-compatible. > This issue was raised on the talk-tr@ mailing list. The conclusion, as you > mentioned, was that the HGK data was not ODbL compatible. Not being ODbL > compatible, we cannot distribute it. > >> The counter argument is that Turkish gazetteer data has been submitted >> by HGK to the UN Group of Experts on Geographic Names (UNGEGN) and is >> therefore in the "public domain". > The list raised the possibility that there might be an alternate source of > Turkish place names. Unfortunately, this doesn't change the status of the > HGK sourced material, which has explicit restrictions against distribution. > > Do you anticipate getting permission from *HGK* to distribute their data? > >> Please STOP "redacting" the Turkish place names. I'll talk to the >> UNGEGN Secretariat tomorrow and revert ASAP. > It should not be technically possible to use the normal revert tools on a > redaction. In any case, do not reintroduce the data downloaded from HGK that > we do not have permission to redistribute. > > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
