André, I guess Glenn’s point is that the license issue cannot be circumvented, even if the king itself says something different than its contents.
You said that Glenn looked at the wrong file, but as far as I can see you didn’t provide any other one. Did you ? From the OSM point of view, Wallonia will need to endorse ODBL or any compatible license scheme in order fro PICC (and others) to be accepted as a valid data source. It’s an administrative and legal point of view, nothing personal for god’s sake ! I was recently in the process of mapping a big bicycle network (Wallonie Picarde à Vélo (4128428) <https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4128428>) and I had to stop at 70% of completion because the Province suddenly asked me (why me ?) to sign some documents that was completely against the ODBL license. Potentially the whole relation could be deleted right now, even if it took me hours and hours of work. It’s sad but I’m afraid that until Wallonia move its ass and enters the 21st century their will be no progress possible on that front. Matthieu > On 7 May 2017, at 17:15, André Pirard <a.pirard.pa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Très long message... Read throughout, up to the end absolutely! Highly > important! > > Despite the explanation on SPW's site that PICC browsing & tracing is public > domain and the report from Julien Fastré, recalled by myself, of what the > PICC told him, the SPW would certainly not sue OSM for using the PICC that > way, vigilantes repeatedly say that the SPW could and they threaten their > mates with OSM exclusion and total contribution removal, whatever the source. > > This letter explains all that in greater detail. > > On 2016-02-26 17:52, Glenn Plas wrote: >> On 26-02-16 14:23, Thib wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> SPW PICC tiles layer is available in JOSM for mapping Belgian Southern >>> area but I can't find enough information about the license terms. >>> >>> Is it allowed to : >>> - copy (doing"calc") buildings and other objects boundaries (as we do >>> with bing tiles) >>> - get address house numbers >>> >>> I've found some old threads talking about that interesting source but no >>> real answer... >>> >>> If someone has any information about it, It would be very useful. >>> >>> Thanks in advance. >>> Regards, >>> >>> Thib >> Reading their license, this is not open data as they restrict the reuse >> and retain the right to change the license later. This data should not >> be used at all imho. Now my french isn't that great on the legal >> vocabulary notes, and correct me if I'm wrong, but it doesn't look good >> to me: >> >> http://geoportail.wallonie.be/files/documents/ConditionsSPW/DataSPW-CGU.pdf >> <http://geoportail.wallonie.be/files/documents/ConditionsSPW/DataSPW-CGU.pdf> >> >> http://geoportail.wallonie.be/files/CopieDataSPW-CGA.pdf >> <http://geoportail.wallonie.be/files/CopieDataSPW-CGA.pdf> >> >> http://geoportail.wallonie.be/files/documents/ConditionsSPW/DataSPW-CGU.pdf >> <http://geoportail.wallonie.be/files/documents/ConditionsSPW/DataSPW-CGU.pdf> >> >> For data to be OSM-fit, you need a compatible license like GRB and AGIV >> have. > You simply looked at the wrong files. >> So, unless someone claims i'm wrong, we should not use this at all, if >> you do... and a claim is made, that data will be removed from OSM by >> analysing the user names involved and their changesets. > It's amazing how many OSM contributors threaten their mates based on > superficial facts or © analysis (1). > Think twice. The danger is that the SPW could complain about OSM ("a > claim"), isn't it? > What could be the problem if they say they will not? > You simply misunderstood their "access rights" and I "claim that you're > wrong" indeed !!! >> I'll be ignoring Lionel's follow-up and act like I didn't read it at all ... >> >> Glenn > On 2016-03-02 09:39, Glenn Plas wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Apparently it's not clear enough > Obviously, and I'm going to try to make it clear. >> You can't use it. It's not a matter of opinion nor I care what certain >> persons from PICC said to someone else I don't really know. I should >> not care either, because that's what licences are for. They show me in >> clear language what can and cannot. > Is it important that you knew Julien Fastré as well as everybody does, and > the person he talked to and who explained on behalf of SPW Carto that only > copying the PICC is licensed and that OSM does not copy it. The license > regarding what we do is "public domain" (explained below). > What could be the problem? >> It's really simple, you check the license. I'm not having the >> discussion on what exactly copying data is (or isn't). > Obviously, if you refuse to understand what the word "copy" means, you will > not understand the word "copyright". >> I was quite >> clear on it: you can only copy data over with compatible licenses. We >> all know what making a copy is in 2016. > No, nobody knows before having understood or asked the copyright owner what > he means with "copy" (1). > And many self-appointed vigilantes do not even do that. >> I'm almost pulling out my hair btw, because you're not making the >> correct conclusions. >> >> You can NOT copy from data sources with incompatible licenses, having a >> high five from someone at PICC does not count as a license. >> >> Glenn > > What "copying" means and what can be done by "tracing" is rather clearly > defined in the Conditions on their site > <http://geoportail.wallonie.be/catalogue/b795de68-726c-4bdf-a62a-a42686aa5b6f.html#tabs-1>. > With PICC, one can do two things (see the titles of the Web page): > Obtenir une copie de la donnée (= get a copy of the data) > > that is copying (downloading files) and the conditions are: > Conditions générales d’accès à l’obtention d’une copie numérique des données > géographiques numériques du Service public de Wallonie > <http://geoportail.wallonie.be/files/documents/ConditionsSPW/DataSPW-CGA.pdf> > Conditions particulières d’accès à l’obtention d’une copie numérique d’une > donnée géographique numérique du Service public de Wallonie –Type B1 > <http://geoportail.wallonie.be/files/documents/ConditionsSPW/DataSPW-CPA-TypeB1.pdf> > Conditions générales d’utilisation des données géographiques numériques du > Service public de Wallonie > <http://geoportail.wallonie.be/files/documents/ConditionsSPW/DataSPW-CGU.pdf> > that is a pay license signed between SPW and user for a well defined > restricted use, time and area... > Consulter (= browsing = what OSM does : tracing VIA A WEB SERVICE) > > that is browsing or tracing and the conditions are: > Conditions d’accès et d’utilisation des services web géographiques de > visualisation du Service public de Wallonie > <http://geoportail.wallonie.be/files/LicServicesSPW.pdf> > that is: "Aucune contrainte d'accès pour la consultation". > absolutely no restriction on what the user can do with browsing and tracing > the PICC > Would anyone be in an urgent need of a "license name" for "consulter", it is > "public domain". > > According to the "Conditions particulières de type B1 > <http://geoportail.wallonie.be/files/documents/ConditionsSPW/DataSPW-CPA-TypeB1.pdf>", > the "copying" of PICC's data is subject to 1) a possibly payed license 2) > signed between SPW and the user 3) for only a well defined, agreed part of > Wallonia 4) over a limited period 5) for an agreed restricted use. > That kind of contract obviously cannot have a license name. But that does not > apply to OSM. > > > So, definitely: … YES WE CAN TRACE THE PICC WMS. > > Please use it with its perfect companion JOSM. > > > Suspecting that the self-appointed vigilantes could not agree with what I > understood and wrote here above, I explained the SPW Carto what OSM does > (tracing, which they already knew) and I asked them to produce a clear > explanation of what is allowed (which I had already understood). > > Please note that this answer letter is an official statement, written with > the help of their lawyer. > Regarding "I [don't] care what certain persons from PICC said to someone else > I don't really know", there is no need to personally know those persons, nor > me, more than the persons who announced Bing's public domain. > >> >> Subject: RE: Utilisation du PICC pour Openstreetmap >> Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 14:27:03 +0000 >> From: helpdesk.carto <helpdesk.ca...@spw.wallonie.be> >> <mailto:helpdesk.ca...@spw.wallonie.be> >> Les utilisations que l’utilisateur peut faire sont : >> >> se connecter sur le serveur du SPW et calquer le PICC afin de faire des >> fonds de plan (=vectoriser), >> réutiliser à sa guise les fonds de plan (1) (commercialement ou non), >> ne peut pas copier le PICC (2) sur ses serveurs à des fins non-commerciales, >> sauf autorisation préalable du SPW (les conditions particulières d’accès et >> d’utilisation s’appliquant aux PICC ont normalement été écrites par la >> Géométrologie et devraient être en ligne pour être opposables aux >> utilisateurs), >> ne peut pas copier PICC (2) sur ses serveurs et les réutiliser à des fins >> commerciales (les revendre ou permettre à ses utilisateurs de les revendre), >> ne peut pas, non plus, recréer le service sur ses serveurs, sauf >> autorisation préalable du SPW. >> (1) Les fonds de plans sont le résultats de la vectorisation que vous >> réaliserez sur base du service. >> Il s’agit là, du résultat de votre vectorisation basée sur le service du >> PICC. >> >> (2) Le point relatif à la copie du PICC concerne les données vectorisées que >> nous distribution. Dans votre cas, cela ne vous concerne pas. >> >> Je reste à votre disposition. >> >> HelpDesk Carto >> >> Département de la Géomatique - >> http://geoportail.wallonie.be <http://geoportail.wallonie.be/>NB: in SPW's >> terminology, "service" means the WMS or similar server. > > This explanation and SPW Carto letter have been added to Mapping resources > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Mapping_resources#SPW_PICC_orthorectified_precision.3C25_cm_Wallonia_map>. > and daughter page > <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Mapping_resources/PICC> > in the wiki. > Which, BTW, needs a serious update. > > Is it clearer now? > > Text and replies continued below. > > Dormez bien (sur vos deux oreilles), > Cheers, > Cordialement, > > André. > > (1) > Often, the © owners make a too limited explanation of their ©. > For example, they say "you can print a personal copy or our maps". > Or "you can use our map if our name is apparent on it". > They have absolutely no notion of the tracing that OSM can do with their map. > How could OSM display on its map names of every sources it contains? > > And, without investigating, OSM vigilantes threaten with exclusions their > mates who would trace it. > > While helping someone with routing problems I mentioned the Michelin map. > I had just imagined that an OSM route could be compared to Michelin's. > Someone came down on me, suspecting me to trace Michelin. > I had just come across ViaMichelin and that map is so coarse that it would be > stupid to trace it. > He threatened to exclude me from OSM and to remove my contributions. > That's removing a good part of the Walloon borders and all a jazz !!! > For not being reported, I had to swear that I never did such a silly thing > and that I never will. > Out of curiosity I contacted Michelin. > I asked them in excellent French if OSM can compare its routes with theirs. > They very kindly replied that the copyright mention is at the bottom left of > their maps. > Including when their "Type de carte" is OSM background. > She did not reply what file contains the copyright text. > And certainly not to my question. > Exactly what I say here above: "a too limited explanation of their ©". > > I made an overpass turbo script showing OSM with the Michelin's colors. > I won't show it because the vigilantes would accuse me to copy Michelin's > colors. > While doing so, I noticed that the main axis Ans-Amercœur wasn't fully > Michelin's colors. > So, this could produce suboptimal routes. > This is because a few N3 streets are tagged highway=secondary instead of > =primary. > I certainly did not correct that because the vigilantes would say that it is > copying Michelin. > >> On 01-03-16 21:48, Erik B wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I understand that there is no clear agreement to use PICC for OSM but it >>> is said and written by different persons from the government that there >>> is nothing against the use of those data for OSM and that we don't risk >>> that data have to be deleted in the future. >>> It means that besides SPW aerial imagery also the data on the PICC map >>> may be used. Does this include the dimensions of the buildings, the >>> house numbers, the names of the streets and the names of rivers, woods, >>> farms and so on? >>> >>> Erik >>> >>> Op 29-02-16 om 17:38 schreef Julien Fastré: >>>> Bonjour, >>>> >>>> On n'est jamais parvenu à obtenir une réponse claire de la part du >>>> SPW. Mais je confirme ce qu'écrit André Pirard: pour eux, recopier nos >>>> données n'est pas les utiliser > autrement dit, "tracer" et utiliser la trace à sa guise est parfaitement > licite. >>>> => donc on pourrait tracer à partir du >>>> PICC comme on le fait à partir de Bing!, selon eux. Le mieux (ou le >>>> pire) c'est qu'ils ont rédigé leur nouvelle licence en partie pour >>>> permettre à OSM d'utiliser ces données (il y a eu vraiment un travail >>>> de ce côté), mais qu'elle reste floue pour qu'on le fasse. > Les Conditions sur le site sont indubitables, mais uniquement pour ceux qui > ont déjà compris ce que nous disons. > Il reste que la référence au fichier de Conditions de traçage manque. Je l'ai > signalé mais rien n'a changé. > Peut-être que si une dizaine de contributeurs faisaient de même, ça se > remarquerait. > L'Union fait la Force, n'est-ce pas. >>>> Maintenant, s'ils se plaignent, je n'ai que des conversations >>>> téléphoniques, des réunions et des échanges de courriels pour défendre >>>> la personne qui serait mise en cause. > Maintenant, nous avons "mon" texte officiel. >>>> En Wallonie, on reste dans le domaine du compromis... >> _______________________________________________ >> Talk-be mailing list >> Talk-be@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be >> <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be> > On 2016-02-26 17:37, lionel bulpa wrote: >> Bonjour, >> >> Pour être honnête, je l'utilise déjà, je ne contribue que de temps en temps >> et mes contributions sont basé sur PICC. Je ne connais pas bien les licences >> etc mais je supposais que si le fond de carte était proposé dans JOSM, cela >> signifiait que nous pouvions l'utiliser. > Pour info, voici >6 ans que Merkaartor présente le PICC dans ses serveurs > pré-configurés et que personne ne dit rien. > Sauf moi que les logiciels devraient afficher les conditions d’utilisation > qu'il trouverait dans les méta-données du serveur. > Et des méta-données disent par leurs absences qu'il n'y a pas de restriction. > Et l'auteur dit qu'elles sont absentes parce que personne ne les lit. > Et l'auteur du logiciel dit qu'il n'est pas nécessaire d'afficher ce qu'on ne > trouve pas. > Et personne ne sait qui est la poule et l'œuf > Tout le monde est d'avis que cette information doit être diffusée au hasard. > Mais que c'est très très très important. >> Si ce n'est pas le cas, merci de m'en informer >> >> Lio :) > Voir ci-dessus ... > > On 2016-02-28 10:53, lionel bulpa wrote: >> J'ai lu vos réponses mais je n'ai pas réussi à en tirer une conclusion >> claire (je dois traduire le texte :P ) Pouvons-nous utiliser les données >> PICC? > Oui. C'est ce que disent ses auteurs. > J'essaye ci-dessus de l'expliquer aux incroyants. > Pour traduire: S3.Google.Translator : excellent > .... > > On 2016-02-28 11:28, Jo wrote: >> Non >> >> So, unless someone claims i'm wrong, we should not use this at all, if >> you do... and a claim is made, that data will be removed from OSM by >> analysing the user names involved and their changesets. >> >> Il ne faut surtout pas l'utiliser. Tu risques d'avoir toutes tes >> contributions relatées expulsées de la base de données OSM. >> >> Polyglot > > Encore une menace non fondée, sans investigation. > > Encore bonjour, > Cordialement, > > André. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-be mailing list > Talk-be@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-be@openstreetmap.org> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be > <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be>
_______________________________________________ Talk-be mailing list Talk-be@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-be
