Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM's future Was: Re: Proposed "Metadata"-Guideline

On Mon, Oct 12, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Steve Coast wrote: > > "our problems" would of course need more definition and I'm running the > risk here of misinterpreting what you said. I'm thinking about all the > cases where OSM isn't used yet, all the mapping that isn't happing in OSM

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Proposed "Metadata"-Guideline

On Fri, Oct 9, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Steve Coast wrote: > If you want all these rights, you can just pick up the phone and pay HERE > or TomTom for them, they’d love to hear from you. What's more interesting than sending people to HERE and TomTom is making them contributors to

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 5:10 AM, Simon Poole wrote: > The later naturally makes the former unnecessary, so we might as well > simply propose that geo-coding creates a non-substantive extract (which has > been suggested btw in a different forum and is in discussion in the LWG). >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Paul Norman <penor...@mac.com> wrote: > On 9/22/2015 4:26 PM, Alex Barth wrote: > >> Overall, I'd love to see us moving towards a share alike interpretation >> that applies to "OSM as the map" and allows for liberal intermin

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Geocoding as produced work

On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Simon Poole wrote: > it might actually force > such a service provider to differentiate between geo-coding for public > vs in-house use. > This suggestion has come up before and I'd like to flag that this is impractical. No organization would and

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Proposed "Metadata"-Guideline

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 6:43 AM, Simon Poole wrote: > One of the big grey areas remaining wrt our distribution licence is > defining if, and how you can link from external data to an OpenStreetMap > derived dataset. Nailing this down is, in my opinion, key to progress in >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Any expert CC-BY -> ODbL negotiators?

On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 9:54 PM, Paul Norman wrote: > The problem is that they have specified a license with attribution that is > unreasonable for geodata (CC BY 3.0 and earlier). > How so? Emphasis is on "in a manner reasonable to the medium" which would be totally

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Any expert CC-BY - ODbL negotiators?

On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Stephan Knauss o...@stephans-server.de wrote: Hello Steve, On 30.08.2015 17:14, Steve Bennett wrote: I wonder if there are any expert licence negotiators here who might be able to get involved in the discussion. I'm no such expert, but they just require

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Any expert CC-BY - ODbL negotiators?

On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 9:04 PM, Steve Bennett stevag...@gmail.com wrote: My understanding was that when you import data into OSM, you assign special permission to the OSMF to re-license the data under ODbL, so you need more than just CC-BY licensing to begin with. Did something change, or

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Working Group news

Mike - Thank you for all your work for OpenStreetMap as member and lead of the Licensing Working Group. I know it's not always fun and work that's often in the focus of heated debate. I've always admired your cool headedness and appreciated your practical advice. Thank you! Alex On Tue, Nov

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 6:45 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: my bad, sorry for the confusion, my comment was referring to the following edit, which was 4 minutes later:

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: where in one of the first paragraphs there is this unproven claim: Geocoding Results are a Produced Work by the definition of the ODbL (section 1.): “Produced Work” – a work (such as an image, audiovisual

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 9:23 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Let's presume we all followed this reading, then when would something actually fall under the definition of derivative database? Why would we still be writing to legal talk instead of using the whole OSM db as a

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Contents Licence for OSM Data

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote: For corporations its most of the time easier to spend 500K€ on a commercial dataset than to spend 5k€ on a Lawyer analyzing a licensing issue. If we add up the cost of all the time company representatives have spent

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

On Thu, Oct 30, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 2014-10-29 20:56 GMT+01:00 Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: Updated: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Open_Data_License%2FGeocoding_-_Guidelinediff=1102233oldid=1076215 wouldn't it make more sense

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Michal Palenik michal.pale...@freemap.sk wrote: 4.4.c. Derivative Databases and Produced Works. A Derivative Database is Publicly Used and so must comply with Section 4.4. if a Produced Work created from the Derivative Database is Publicly Used. which say,

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

I have two questions on the Collective DB alternative: The derivative database consists of the data that has been used as the input data for the geocoding process, as well as the data that has been gained from OpenStreetMap in the process. Any additional data that may be linked to this data,

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: I'm wondering if we should replace geocodes with geocoding results throughout the page. I think it improves clarity as to what is being discussed, and geocodes is not a term in common use for what we are discussing.

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: A geocoding result is not the same as a database of geocoding results. Column 1 says the former is a produced work, but is silent on the latter. I updated the guide to be explicit about this case:

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

Hey Michal - On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 9:38 AM, Michal Palenik michal.pale...@freemap.sk wrote: alex, please read 4.6 of odbl, which basically says there is no difference between derivative db and produced work with regards to database rights. 4.6 talks about disclosure standards in cases

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

, 2014 at 12:53 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote: How would the Collective Database approach work if the OSM Database must remain unmodified to be part of a Collective Database? The definition of Collective

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

Good call on geocodes - geocoding results. That's clearer. On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: What do you think the status of a database of geocoding results is under the interpretation in column 1? According to the interpretation in column 1, the ODbL

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] White Paper on ODbL and OSM

I posted a summary of the white paper on my diary. In discussions at State of the Map US and EU people have asked for a more comprehensive review of the license and more specific use cases that we're currently missing out on - which in turn means contributors we're missing out on. I hope this

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

How would the Collective Database approach work if the OSM Database must remain unmodified to be part of a Collective Database? The definition of Collective Database seems to be tailored to use cases where the OpenStreetMap database *in unmodified form* is part of a larger database. I can't quite

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OpenStreetMap Geocoded Replication Data and Licensing

Peter - Do we have the ability to assign our own license to this replication data, or will we have to release the replication data under the ODC Open Database License? My read is yes, you have the ability to assign your own license to the dataset you're creating. Note you'll have to attribute

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] YouTube videos

I've in the past used information from Youtube videos in rare instances. For example to confirm the surface quality of a road. Facts aren't copyrightable. I'd love to hear a more qualified person's opinion though. On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 2:25 PM, Martijn van Exel m...@rtijn.org wrote: Hi all,

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 12:31 AM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: On 7/28/2014 12:07 AM, Alex Barth wrote: On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: Please review: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Geocoding_-_Guideline Alex, you

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Am 28/lug/2014 um 09:07 schrieb Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: Our lawyers' advice is captured in the guideline as shared and posted in this revision: your lawyers did really say according

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

On Sat, Jul 26, 2014 at 11:02 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: Again and again we hear, make it easier for people to geocode their proprietary databases and OSM can only benefit from it because everyone who saves $$ using OSM somehow magically helps OSM. I'm not convinced of that.

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: Please review: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/ Geocoding_-_Guideline Alex, you mention it was based on what you've gotten from lawyers. Is there anything that can be shared, either publicly, or with

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: If you apply this to your above example, the addresses would be subject to SA (however no further information), and while potentially one could infer that these are likely the addresses of the store locations, no further

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

: On 2014-07-14 8:15 AM, Martijn van Exel wrote: On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 8:44 AM, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote: This is also how I'm reading this. Obviously the sticky point is the definition of what's a database in this sentence: systematically recreate a database from the process. You

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

We're 100% in grey territory on geocoding and you can keep reading the ODbL in circles. “Produced Work” – a work (such as an image, audiovisual material, text, or sounds) resulting from using the whole or a Substantial part of the Contents (via a search or other query) from this Database, a

[OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

I just updated the Wiki with a proposed community guideline on geocoding. In a nutshell: geocoding with OSM data yields Produced Work, share alike does not apply to Produced Work, other ODbL stipulations such as attribution do apply. The goal is to remove all uncertainties around geocoding to

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

Just a reminder, this thread started of with a discussion of attribution, or rather lack of such Doesn't help that the original post conflates the issues :p On Tuesday, April 29, 2014, Simon Poole si...@poole.ch wrote: Just a reminder, this thread started of with a discussion of

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution

Steve, Agreed on a transparent process for tracking unattributed applications of OpenStreetMap. Separate from attribution however, the issue with “share-alike” is that it's not open, and hurting our community. ODbL's share alike is simply shutting out OpenStreetMap from many use cases = adoption

[OSM-legal-talk] Clarifying Geocoding and ODbL

With two State of the Map conferences coming up now and plenty of opportunities for face time, I'd like to restart our conversation around clarifying the ODbL's implications for geocoding and get to a result. Over here at MapBox we're hoping to use OpenStreetMap soon as much as possible for

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License question, user clicking on map

On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 12:16 AM, Paul Norman penor...@mac.com wrote: The fact that you can’t mix OSM + proprietary data and then distribute it as some kind of “OSM but better” without releasing the proprietary data is a feature of share-alike licenses, not a bug. Not every feature is a good

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License question, user clicking on map

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 11:54 PM, Jake Wasserman jwasser...@gmail.comwrote: 'It makes no difference whether you store the data sets separately, or together in the same database software, whether that is a RDBMS, NOSQL, filesystem or anything else. So long as the other data isn't derived from

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License question, user clicking on map

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 7:17 PM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: I think that the OSM community is already very open towards commercial use; This is bigger than just commercial use. The ODbL is an obstacle to contribute to OSM for anyone - business or not - who is bound by the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License question, user clicking on map

On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote: My understanding is you are saying I would like it to be this way, but at the moment it is not. Correct? Correct. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License question, user clicking on map

On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Kate Chapman k...@maploser.com wrote: My understanding is you are saying I would like it to be this way, but at the moment it is not. Correct? Actually to be more specific: I'm saying I would like geocoding-like use cases to be clarified, at the moment it is

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License question, user clicking on map

Rob - as long as you don't mix ODbL data and other data in the same database, ODbL's share alike cause doesn't kick in. So using the OSM tiles on your web site doesn't mean that data in your web site is affected. I recommend reading the ODbL, it's pretty clear that way

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License question, user clicking on map

I think all of these use cases should be ok and we should adjust the community guide lines to clarify that ODbL's share alike clause shouldn't kick in here. On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Olov McKie o...@mckie.se wrote: Hello all! I have a few usecases for OSM where I do not know if I can

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Working Group 2013

-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk Alex Barth http://twitter.com/lxbarth tel (+1) 202 250 3633 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Talk-us] press from SOTM US

, the dataset of such addresses and any associated information would probably always be tainted). Simon ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk Alex Barth http://twitter.com/lxbarth

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Talk-us] press from SOTM US

On Oct 25, 2012, at 2:43 PM, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote: +1 for examples. I'm working on pulling some together. The like for like principle overlooks that data submitted to geocoders can be sensitive for privacy or IP reasons. Think of geocoding patient data, client data, suppliers

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Talk-us] press from SOTM US

s:mikelmaron From: Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com To: Licensing and other legal discussions. legal-talk@openstreetmap.org Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 2:43 PM Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Talk-us] press from SOTM US +1 for examples. I'm working on pulling some together. The like

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Talk-us] press from SOTM US

Alex Barth http://twitter.com/lxbarth tel (+1) 202 250 3633 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data

-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk Alex Barth http://twitter.com/lxbarth tel (+1) 202 250 3633 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk