Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL: incompatibility issues

2009/3/2 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: 80n wrote: I can imagine a scenario where, for example, Google uses Amazon's Mechanical Turk to pay lots of people to use Map Maker to trace from OSM's rendered tiles. Is this a scenario we could try to fight when it happens, instead of

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Privacy and Terms

2009/6/25 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Yeah, sure, and if I leave the house a brick might fall on my head and I'd be dead. I'm almost sure you wanted to write tile ;-) cheers, Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Privacy and Terms

2009/6/25 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: For example, if we build strong national chapters that, legally, are separate from OSMF, these could easily between themselves set up all the servers required to replace everything OSMF operates. With such a healthy backup network, it would not

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Privacy and Terms

2009/6/25 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: Hallo Frederik oops, sorry, not for the list. Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Adding UK post box information

2009/7/14 Gervase Markham gerv-gm...@gerv.net: Royal Mail doesn't know the exact location of all its postboxes. If we find out for them, what are the chances they would sue us? It's flipping useful from their point of view. They could apply proper Travelling Salesman algorithms to them to

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Non-existant streets

2009/8/12 John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com: One such road went into someone's car port, I don't think we have barrier=car_port :) in this case it will not be a road but a highway=service in Europe and probably access=private (at least for the last few meters), don't know about the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Non-existant streets

2009/8/12 John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com: --- On Wed, 12/8/09, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: yes, don't mark them as normal roads if they are in a degraded state. It's worst than that in a lot of cases, they were gazetted, but never built. there is also a tagging

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Non-existant streets

2009/8/12 John Smith delta_foxt...@yahoo.com: We're not trying to put copyrighted information in the database, we're recording an observation, no different then recording the name on a street sign, no, it's not the same. Because you're gonna write that there is nothing. Why there? Why don't

[OSM-legal-talk] Fwd: [OSM-talk] copyright problem with data copied from a map

://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk -- ___ Martin Koppenhoefer (Dipl-Ing. Arch.) c/o Sebastianelli Via del Santuario Regina degli Apostoli, 18 00145 Roma Italia N41.8739, E12.5141 tel1: +39 06.916508070 tel2: +49 30 868708638 mobil: +39 389 6488991 m...@koppenhoefer.com http

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Fwd: [OSM-talk] copyright problem with data copiedfrom a map

2009/8/17 Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com: You may wish to set up a Belgium equivalent for this page to act as a record of such reverts. As you can see we have been having some problems of our own. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/GB_revert_request_log actually I just fwded. the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license status

2009/9/28 Jukka Rahkonen jukka.rahko...@mmmtike.fi: Mike Collinson m...@... writes: Article 10 Term of protection 1. The right provided for in Article 7 shall run from the date of completion of the making of the database. It shall expire fifteen years from the first of January of the year

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license status

2009/9/28 Gustav Foseid gust...@gmail.com: 2009/9/28 Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es Better? :-) :-) does this mean yes? What is the situation with planned Odbl? cheers, Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] What should be considered legal?

Thanks. The reason I asked that was that I frequently forget where the GPS trace was taken - was it a road or a track, which village or whatever else. This usually happens in areas where OSM map is pitch white :) Yahoo maps aren't very helpful there either. well, you can still upload the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] The detrimental effects of database

2011/11/23 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: But I think that the specific example under discussion here actually falls short of even this lowered bar. It is quite possible for me to grab a whole Way in JOSM and move it one metre to the left (which makes me the last editor of, potentially,

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL and publishing source data

2011/11/29 Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org: A PNG doesn't fit this description as its intent is to encode a single complete image and the pixels are not independent. Likewise PNG and SVG. Place them in a systematic or methodical collection and you have a database of images. But this is separate

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] feedback requested

2011/12/21 ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl: I think it's relevant that node changes as suggested should involve stand alone nodes only (such as POI). Once they are part of a structure of say a building or a road, water or any area, the nodes should be

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Maxspeed tags in Australia

2012/1/13 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Ok, I've discussed this off-list with Nick and did a test run for 1000 (of roughly a quarter million) ways. Here is one example touched by the script: http://www.openstreetmap.org/browse/way/4018604 Nice, this will also significantly change the

[OSM-legal-talk] whitewashing nodes without tags

I know that some variants of this topic already have been under discussion, but I'd like to add another version to it, where I believe that indeed there will be no copyright left by the declining mapper. Three mappers Ac1, Ac2 (acceptors) and Dec1 (decliner) edit an object: 1. Ac1 creates a

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Critical Mass for license change-over

2012/1/29 Dirk-Lüder Kreie osm-l...@deelkar.net: demotivated by the data loss. but filling in gaps is really much quicker done than starting from scratch. +1, at least there already are tags for most things, comfortable editors and lots of experienced mappers ;-) cheers, Martin

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Contact And Remap Campaign

2012/2/13 Simon Poole si...@poole.ch: PS: essentially such an import should never get pass the community discussion part in the first place. FYI: In Italy there are currently some imports going on, where the data is licensed cc-by-2.5 and there are also other imports of the past under this

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Feedback requested ... OSM Poland data

Am 6. März 2012 17:52 schrieb Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: On 03/06/2012 02:36 PM, Frederik Ramm wrote: Personally, I don't think that *verifying* their data against OSM data (in the sense of flagging potential problems, as long as they don't copy our data outright) would be a valid use

[OSM-legal-talk] WAS Re: [OSM-dev] Licence of the Mapnik style?

Am 11. April 2012 00:06 schrieb Mike Dupont jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com: and this on the copyright of css : http://b0x0rz.deviantart.com/journal/Is-CSS-Copyrightable-214148624 First, a short answer to a question (for the impatient ones): Is CSS Copyrightable? No. Absolutely NOT. (note:

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Response from Hampshire County Council

2012/6/11 Nick Whitelegg nick.whitel...@solent.ac.uk: In answer to the queries below, the data is free to use as is the OS open data on their website. ... So in short, we believe the RoW data can be incorporated into OpenStreetmap as long as acknowledgement and copyright is shown from where it

[OSM-legal-talk] Wiki fotos with Unkunown license

What does Unknown license mean for fotos in the wiki? Isn't there a requirement for them to be at least available under cc-by-sa? An example is here: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Ballroom.jpg cheers, Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list

[OSM-legal-talk] Is there a PD part in OSM?

I wonder if data you download now or did so in the past from OSM servers can be used as PD data. There are some users who have publicly declared that they consider their contributions to OSM to be in the public domain. For simplicity I'd like to restrict this question to users who have either made

[OSM-legal-talk] CT compatibility with attribution only licenses

Reading the wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines#Make_sure_data_license_is_OK quote What we certainly cannot do is require end-users of our data/renderings to give credit to the particular data donor. With this in mind, our attribution may not be sufficient legally speaking

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licenses for Produced Works under ODbL

2012/10/22 Igor Brejc igor.br...@gmail.com: Would there be a difference if it was PNG/SVG instead of PDF? there are 2 ways to put graphics into a PDF: those with vectors embedded and those with a raster inside. The first is to treat like a SVG and the second like a PNG (always asuming you

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

2012/10/24 andrzej zaborowski balr...@gmail.com: As has been noted in the Public Domain subset thread, the contributors can make license statement that they like, but the OSMF can still enforce the database rights. So a statement by the contributors (e.g. on OSM wiki) that is not confirmed by

[OSM-legal-talk] CTs, procedure to change of the license

During the license change from cc-by-sa to ODbL the issue was raised that 3 weeks for an active contributor to respond to a voting for a license change was not sufficient and IIRR the response was that this would be dealt with later. What is the view on this? How can this detail be changed, and

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CTs, procedure to change of the license

I found the thread: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/OSM-legal-talk-CT-time-period-for-reply-to-a-new-license-change-active-contributor-td5270119.html basically what Michael Collinson wrote makes sense: - In the case of a major license change, there would be a run up of at least several months of

[OSM-legal-talk] Copyright and license page, how to do the details

I am reading the new copyright and license page, but don't find it very clear to understand. http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright How to credit OpenStreetMap We require that you use the credit “© OpenStreetMap contributors”. You must also make it clear that the data is available under the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licenses for Produced Works under ODbL

2012/10/30 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: See also: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Closed_Issues#What_sort_of_access_to_Derivative_Databases_is_required.3F The page is quite old; the green boxes represent legal advice that we have received at the time. It is also

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licenses for Produced Works under ODbL

deliberately Offlist 2012/10/30 Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz: No loop hole. Unless I am missing something earlier in the thread, this is covering very old ground. This is the LWG understanding: The buzz phrase is layered copyright. Using an open licensed photo of a MacDonald's

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Copyright and license page, how to do the details

Looking at the licensing page there is still the explicit requirement to credit osm in the corner of the map and in the meantime the FAQ has been amended with the same requirement. Some time ago this wasn't required explicitly, that's why I ask when this was introduced and by whom? (the old

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] (c) statement on openstreetmap.org slippy map?

2013/1/17 Jeff Meyer j...@gwhat.org from http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright: For a browsable electronic map, the credit should appear in the corner of the map. For example: below there is this paragraph: Finding out more Read more about using our data, and how to credit us, at the Legal

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [GIS-Kosova] OSM road network for Kosova

Am 07/mar/2013 um 16:21 schrieb Bekim Kajtazi bekim.kajt...@gmail.com: Whatever case it is...the data is gone!!! Generally it is your responsibility to keep your contact information up to date. I sent 2 times around 100-200 emails to the major contributors to OSM on the Italian grounds

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Permissibility of incorporating parts of an address from a business' website

2013/4/25 Iván Sánchez Ortega i...@sanchezortega.es The answer to this might be different if your jurisdiction doesn't apply the european database directive. But which is the relevant jurisdiction, the one the mapper is in, or the one the database is in (i.e. where you perform the actual

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Permissibility of incorporating parts of an address from a business' website

2013/4/25 Pieren pier...@gmail.com I'm not sure it has to do with non-substantial amounts of data. But business websites publishing their own address or list of addresses is reallly intended to be shared and republished everywhere. I'd also see it like this, it is quite unlikely that they

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Clarifying Geocoding and ODbL

2013/6/7 Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com 2. The ODbL is too vague in the definition of its terms, requiring additional clarifications by licensor. This is most importantly the case around the terms derivative database and what constitutes a substantial extraction of data [3]. At least for the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Clarifying Geocoding and ODbL

On 13/giu/2013, at 15:58, Olov McKie o...@mckie.se wrote: All other geocoding results in a Produced Work, IMHO it results in a Derivative Database, as long as the amount of data geocoded is not too small. Cheers, Martin ___ legal-talk mailing

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Place name translations

On 16/giu/2013, at 03:47, Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com wrote: While I agree with Richard, it might be interesting to know that Wikidata (a Wikimedia.de project) is licensed CC-0, and they copy data wholesale from Wikipedia. that's indeed interesting, how can they throw the original

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Place name translations

On 16/giu/2013, at 12:14, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: that's indeed interesting, how can they throw the original viral licenses of Wikipedia overboard? Based on what I've seen, what they are copying from Wikipedia are data and facts. In the US, facts are not

[OSM-legal-talk] Attribution and licensing problems at diverse main map providers

I wonder if we have a strategy how to deal with companies who use our data but don't attribute in the right way or don't adhere to the license terms. In the past we had Apple (still unsolved, at least since April 2012) and Microsoft (using military areas from OSM to blur their imagery), now there

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Imagery license clarification needed

2013/8/25 Stephan Knauss o...@stephans-server.de The license text says: “ The party receiving the data cannot share the imagery or LIDP with a third party without express permission from the USG. At no time should this imagery or LIDP be used for other than USG-related purposes and must

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [HOT] Imagery license clarification needed

2013/8/29 Mikel Maron mikel_ma...@yahoo.com Their is clear and full understanding by USG that data digitized into OSM is made available under the ODbL, which allows commercial use. This is stated on their website at https://hiu.state.gov/ittc/ittc.aspx(Description tab). Data cc-by-sa

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Question on publication of slides with Google and Bing screenshots

2013/9/10 Martin Feuersaenger m...@feuersaenger.de So my question is: Is my conclusion right, can I publish under less restrictive terms, or do I need to remove the shots in order to publish at all? You should ask Google and Bing about this, it is not related to OSM ;-) cheers, Martin

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Question about mixing OSM with licensed data -- eg: mapquest

2013/11/2 Abhishek cheerful...@gmail.com I'm confused about what the rules are for downstream commercial users of OSM data to merge OSM data with other sources. Apple seems have done this with their Maps product. You can't really see Apple as a reference, because of two reasons: 1. they

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution Requirements

Am 10/gen/2014 um 13:01 schrieb Simon Poole si...@poole.ch: And I'm very tired of people trying to weasel around the absolute minimal requirements we pose on reuse of OSM data. like APPL? ;-) cheers, Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution Requirements

2014/1/12 Simon Poole si...@poole.ch Apple does not, as far as we know, use OSM data ODbL licensed by the foundation. yes, they are supposedly ignoring former requirements (still valid for older data). cheers, Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Corine Land Cover?

2014/1/13 pmsg pmsg2...@yahoo.com Thank you for your opinions, pmsg legal issues aside my concern is that Corine Data is not suitable technically for OSM: the resolution is too low and not compatible with the rest of our data. cheers, Martin ___

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attribution Requirements

Am 14/gen/2014 um 10:54 schrieb Simon Poole si...@poole.ch: a IMHO good example of what we want http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/contact/spaces/ no mention of ODbL and the attribution three screens after the map (on mobile, maybe this looks different on a desktop)? cheers, Martin

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Corine Land Cover?

2014/1/14 pmsg pmsg2...@yahoo.com can we use Corine Land Cover data? I think not, but I would be grateful to be tought something different. I think it depends on the country, AFAIK this is not one big dataset but several datasets, with different licensing according to the contributing

[OSM-legal-talk] Copyright of old media / images / maps

Anybody can explain how it can be legal to claim copyright on old material, say 18th or 19th century works? When browsing the web (mostly library pages and catalogues) those institutions often claim full copyright and prohibit reproduction, distribution etc. of the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Copyright of old media / images / maps

2014-04-05 6:01 GMT+02:00 Andreas Labres l...@lab.at: Below the line the question is: was the act of reproducing that thing an act of creation (Akt der Schöpfung im Sinne des Urheberrechts; also mit der nötigen Schöpfungshöhe). This is usually granted for a photography. The copyright status

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using Google Street View to perform virtual survey

Am 07/apr/2014 um 02:24 schrieb Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com: You can always file for a declaratory judgment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaratory_judgment interesting, wouldn't it be a good idea to try this for deriving facts from google sat or street view? On the other

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using Google Street View to perform virtual survey

Am 07/apr/2014 um 19:57 schrieb Simon Poole si...@poole.ch: forgetting the ethical side of it (do we really want to use data collected by somebody that doesn't want us to do so?), from an ethical point of view you could also see it like this: as the information (geographic facts) in the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using Google Street View to perform virtual survey

2014-04-08 10:39 GMT+02:00 Simon Poole si...@poole.ch: @Martin It is undoubtedly so that the information in question is -not- simply available for use. You need to invest the time and effort to actually go out and collect it. Google has done so and that we should respect, regardless of

[OSM-legal-talk] Upload of copyrighted map images from OSM to Facebook

Following the German Blog there was a post today referencing this forum thread: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=411611#p411611 where the contributors come to the conclusion that uploading OSM map images to Facebook is against the osm maps license (cc-by-sa). It looks as if they

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Upload of copyrighted map images from OSM to Facebook

2014-04-15 18:59 GMT+02:00 Richard Weait rich...@weait.com: What do you suggest, Martin? contact Facebook and if they are not willing to make an exception to their terms we'll have to delete our accounts there (seems to be the only way to remove images according to their terms). In case of

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Upload of copyrighted map images from OSM to Facebook

2014-04-15 19:22 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-04-15 18:59 GMT+02:00 Richard Weait rich...@weait.com: What do you suggest, Martin? contact Facebook and if they are not willing to make an exception to their terms we'll have to delete our accounts there (seems

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Upload of copyrighted map images from OSM to Facebook

2014-04-15 19:59 GMT+02:00 Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us: OSMF only has two photos posted. We can easily remove the map and the logo. I think we can keep the logo as it is protected as a registered brand, but even if you remove the map image from our page they will continue to have

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Upload of copyrighted map images from OSM to Facebook

A user on the Italian Mailing List posted this link concerning Facebook's integration of Wikipedia content into the so-called facebook community pages: https://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/21721 In this case they achieved to retain the cc-by-sa attribution and all backlinks to Wikipedia.

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attributing OpenStreetMap at Mapbox

2014-04-30 20:48 GMT+02:00 Richard Weait rich...@weait.com: I feel that the attribution that you currently use provides insufficient recognition for OpenStreetMap. there was also a discussion one year ago on a similar topic (attribution by an icon instead by a text) to which I'd like to

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Creative Commons license question

Am 04/mag/2014 um 08:44 schrieb Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz: An organisation is making a short film/video which will be released CC-BY. They want to show (fleetingly) OSM map tiles ... which are CC-BY-SA- 2.0. Can they do that? Is this different to publishing a book (full

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] The edges of share-alike on data Re: Attribution

2014-05-05 14:05 GMT+02:00 Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de: *And share-alike only applies to what we collect.* Let me first say that this is a brilliantly clear way to put it. I like this a lot. I believe this is somehow more limiting than what we actually might want. E.g. we don't

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] The edges of share-alike on data Re: Attribution

2014-05-05 17:42 GMT+02:00 Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org: Usage may be different, but the data is the same: ways with an hypothetical 'speed' attribute added to them in the persistent database of your choice. Whether you use that joined data to perform Dijkstra stunts or just render it

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Imports] N50 imports from Kartverket (The Norwegian Mapping Authority)

Am 21/giu/2014 um 23:03 schrieb Paul Norman penor...@mac.com: As a reminder, CC BY 3.0 and earlier are incompatible for reasons related to the attribution requirements. can you expand on this? I remember there are already heaps of data with these licenses (cc-by 3.0 and older) in OSM.

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

Am 11/lug/2014 um 16:41 schrieb Michal Palenik michal.pale...@freemap.sk: so wording As Geocodes are a Produced Work, they do not trigger the share-alike clauses of the ODbL. is totally against section 4.6. +1 the data contained in produced works remains ruled by ODbL / share alike, this

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

2014-07-14 20:26 GMT+02:00 Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: Just like how CC-BY-SA created a grey area around the SA implications for the rendered map which wasn't good for OSM, ODbL does the same with permanent geocoding. To make OSM viable for geocoding we can't have its ODbL infecting the

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

2014-07-15 18:01 GMT+02:00 Michal Palenik michal.pale...@freemap.sk: btw, cp planet.osm.bz2 planet.png creates a produced work... LOL I'd doubt this, because an image is likely not to be read like in disk image, and not every file with an png extension will be considered an image...

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

Am 24/lug/2014 um 23:03 schrieb Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: In this example, the database powering the geocoder is a derived database. The geocoding results are produced works, which are then collected into what forms a derivative database as part of a collective database. Not following

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

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 to their understanding a pair of coordinates is similar to an image or a video, hence a work? The

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

Il giorno 30/lug/2014, alle ore 16:44, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com ha scritto: your lawyers did really say according to their understanding a pair of coordinates is similar to an image or a video, hence a work? Yeah, there's no definition of 'work' in the ODbL, just a non-exclusive list

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

2014-10-29 12:32 GMT+01:00 SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk: What I read was MapBox pays some bloke called Kevin doesn't seem to be a nobody in this field though: Kevin is the Executive Director of the Centre for Spatial Law and Policy and a lawyer focusing on the unique legal and

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

2014-10-29 13:47 GMT+01:00 Sachin Dole sd...@genvega.com: ... if there was lot more clarity. I imagine, ..., that contributors and other stakeholders might also benefit from commercial users if the license is clear that only data gathered from OSM be shared alike leaving derivative or

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

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 to come to a conclusion here before updating the wiki? cheers, Martin

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

2014-11-02 23:11 GMT+01:00 Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: We have no significant third party ODbL data releases due to OSM share alike to show for Actually the Italian Government has designed their open data license (IODL) to be compatible with OdbL:

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

2014-11-03 0:17 GMT+01:00 Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: 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 to come to a conclusion here

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

2014-11-03 15:05 GMT+01:00 Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: 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

[OSM-legal-talk] Use of OSM Data in Apple Maps

As many of you may already be aware of, Apple is supposedly using ODbL data from OSM after their recent update, in their iOS App Maps, together with other data (some of which proprietary, some public domain) and appearently also together with older data from OSM (pre-license change). They still

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Use of OSM Data in Apple Maps

2014-11-24 19:26 GMT+01:00 Michael Kugelmann michaelk_...@gmx.de: Am 24.11.2014 17:21, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: As many of you may already be aware of, Apple is supposedly using ODbL data from OSM after their recent update, in their iOS App Maps, together with other data (some of which

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Travel Channel + OSM

2015-02-25 9:51 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole si...@poole.ch: If they want we won't sue you reassurance the proper place to ask is legal-questi...@osmfoundation.org out of curiosity, how many people have been sued in the past 11 years of OpenStreetMap? ;-) cheers, Martin

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

thank you Michal, I see it now. I have finally discovered that I cannot contribute much to this list and apologize for having caused disruption from time to time, I'm unsubscribing, see you on the other lists ;-) Cheers, Martin ___ legal-talk mailing

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

2015-10-13 21:08 GMT+02:00 Frederik Ramm : > rankly, if there was a halfway usable repository of open > addresses that could be merged with OSM for those who want it, and if > open addresses become available for regions where OSM already has > addresses, I'd not be opposed to

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

sent from a phone > Am 24.09.2015 um 11:23 schrieb Frederik Ramm : > > > I would hesitate to apply this rule for making a selection that can not > be repeated ("select reverse geocoding results for this non-public list > of coordinates and store them in my non-public

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

2015-09-21 12:43 GMT+02:00 Simon Poole : > I have to say that I'm not completely happy with the document as is, > however nobody has come up with anything better. It will definitely need > some more examples in a final version. > I don't believe that the restaurant star rating

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

Is there a problem with the current license? Is it not clear from a legal point of view, how it should be interpreted? I must admit I feel some reluctance towards the practise of introducing more and more examples and guidelines how to interpret the legal text, because every additional word is

[OSM-legal-talk] new wiki page ODbL compatibility of common licenses

Following a thread on the OSMF-talk list, I am kindly asking you to review and improve a new wiki page that tries to give an overview about the compatibility of common licenses with the ODbL and CT: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/ODbL_Compatibility Feel free to modify and improve this

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] new wiki page ODbL compatibility of common licenses

2016-01-18 16:21 GMT+01:00 Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) < robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com>: > Some comments / suggestions: > > thank you for your comments. > * In the notes column, it might be better to say "rights holder(s)" > rather than "licensor" since the former is presumably the only >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] new wiki page ODbL compatibility of common licenses

2016-01-19 10:38 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole : > As has been pointed out here before CC-BY 4.0 is essentially a completely > new license (compared to previous CC-BY versions) and potentially is not > "fixable", definitely it is not just a question of getting permission to > attribute on

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

sent from a phone > Am 13.03.2016 um 13:11 schrieb Tobias Wendorff > : > > This would mean: If I show parking facilities for bikes as an GPX or > GeoJSON overlay as a layer an top of the OpenStreetMap base tiles, > which might already included existing

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

sent from a phone > Am 13.03.2016 um 13:47 schrieb Tobias Wendorff > : > > "If the published result of your project is intended for the extraction > of the original data, then it is a database and not a Produced Work." shouldn't this go further and include

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

sent from a phone > Am 13.03.2016 um 11:39 schrieb Tobias Wendorff > : > > There needs to be a revision of the ODbL to cleary state, what's a > printed map. From the legal site, it's not a "produced work" by the > old meaning anymore. I believe it has always

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

sent from a phone > Am 13.03.2016 um 13:01 schrieb Tobias Wendorff > : > > I'm seeing a problem in the formulation: it might be not correct to call > a map a "produced work" anymore. what other things besides maps can be produced from our db? Not many (yes,

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] attributive data enrichment using OSM

sent from a phone > Il giorno 22 lug 2016, alle ore 14:46, Stefan Jäger ha > scritto: > > My question now is: if we enrich our data (with only underlying attributes, > no geometry from OSM at all) with such a process using OSM data, is this then > a produced work (or a

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] School Units Data Resources in Greece

sent from a phone > Il giorno 21 lug 2016, alle ore 11:43, Νίκος Σταματόπουλος > ha scritto: > > a) Is it legal to use public data although it is not strictly stated as > CC, GPU or other License? > if there is no license the default is full copyright and

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Australian Government Data from data.gov.au

2016-06-30 12:47 GMT+02:00 Tobias Wendorff : > > Do you always have to attribute once something got imported, even if > there > > a no (visual) traces of this import any more? E.g. you could say that all > > following contributions built on what was there at a

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Australian Government Data from data.gov.au

sent from a phone > Il giorno 30 giu 2016, alle ore 13:15, Christoph Hormann > ha scritto: > > The whole idea to me seems completely impractical. +1 what we might do: add an auto generated list of all osm user pseudonyms with at least one edit at the bottom of the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Australian Government Data from data.gov.au

2016-06-29 23:58 GMT+02:00 Tobias Wendorff <tobias.wendo...@tu-dortmund.de>: > Am Mi, 29.06.2016, 23:46 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > > Is there still need to attribute the original creator? > > In my opinion that's what CC-BY is all about. You're allowed to change >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Australian Government Data from data.gov.au

sent from a phone > Il giorno 29 giu 2016, alle ore 23:26, Tobias Wendorff > ha scritto: > > Oh come on, that's no valid argument. A script can handle this and > output the source of the data imported into this area. Nobody would > need to analyse the data on

  1   2   >