This is really good news and thank you Rob for flagging it. Thanks also to the unknown folks at OS who have been working on this ... it follows through on a promise made to me in 2010 that they would look at.

As cautioned by Rob, do wait until http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/business-and-government/licensing/using-creating-data-with-os-products/os-opendata.html updates before jumping into CodePoint data with abandon ... it is from a not very open friendly third party and the OGL does allow exemptions for that.

I believe also that this will be good news for ?English Heritage, (sorry, I live in Sweden), data users as it removes an ambiguity over which of their data is covered by OGL and which by the now retired OS OpenData license.

On the change from OGL 2 to OGL 3, I am a bit less enthusiastic. I sat down with a large cup of coffee, compared them line by line and made the notes below. The thing to highlight is the change to the "You" definition which does possibly shift some of concern about the OS Opendata license into the OGL itself. The usual caveat: IANAL.

Mike

The non-trivial changes between OGL 2 and OGL 3 are as follows:

Insertion:

"You must, where you do any of the above: acknowledge the source of the Information by including *or linking to* any attribution statement specified by the Information Provider(s) and, where possible, provide a link to this licence; "

This is good news.

Additional wording:

"If you are using Information from several Information Providers and listing multiple attributions is not practical in your product or application, you may include a URI or hyperlink to a resource that contains the required attribution statements."

This is good news, it follows practise that we have set up in OpenStreetMap.

'You',*'you' and 'your'* means the natural or legal person, or body of persons corporate or incorporate, acquiring rights *in the Information (whether the Information is obtained directly from the Licensor or otherwise)* under this licence.

This could potentially imply that users of OpenStreetMap data for the UK, for example to make a map, might have to additionally attribute the OS, (or other bodies). Just being paranoid here but I think it is worth following up. On the other hand in both OGL 2 and OGL 3 is this explicit statement:

"These terms are compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 and the Open Data Commons Attribution License"

The wording of the latter is at http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/by/1-0/

Since the ODBL and Attribution License share common ancestry on attribution drafting, then quite likely we are compatible too by extension. But it needs some one to sit down and compare both licenses. Apologies but I lack time these days.



On 18/02/2015 19:41, Owen Boswarva wrote:
(I should clarify that by "compatible" I meant forward-compatible rather than interoperable. OGL data is suitable as an input to a OdBL dataset, but not vice versa.)

-- Owen (@owenboswarva)


On 18 February 2015 at 18:04, Jo Walsh <metaz...@fastmail.net <mailto:metaz...@fastmail.net>> wrote:

    I asked @owenboswarva on Twitter who is an active voice whom i
    trust on open government data issues, and he said this:
    "IMO the only significant difference is v3 explicitly permits
    re-users to list multiple attributions via a URI or link.
    ...the differences are mostly just tidier syntax. If you are happy
    v2 is compatible with OdBL (IMO it is) then v3 is also."
    zx
    --
    Jo Walsh
    metaz...@fastmail.net <mailto:metaz...@fastmail.net>
    On Wed, Feb 18, 2015, at 12:04 AM, Rob Nickerson wrote:
    On 17 February 2015 at 23:57, Matthijs Melissen
    <i...@matthijsmelissen.nl <mailto:i...@matthijsmelissen.nl>> wrote:


        I could imagine that OGL-3 has imported OS ODL's clause on
        sublicensing that caused incompatibility with ODbL, which
        would make
        OGL-3 incompatible with ODbL.Do we have confirmation that
        this is not
        the case, i.e. that OGL-3 and ODbL are compatible?

        -- Matthijs

    All the OGL versions are online. A comparison of v2 and v3 shows
    nothing to worry me. Hopefully Robert W will chip in as he's
    clued up on all this.
    Version 3:
    http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/
    Version 2:
    http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/2/
    _________________________________________________
    Talk-GB mailing list
    Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org>
    https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

    _______________________________________________
    Talk-GB mailing list
    Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org <mailto:Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org>
    https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb




_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
Talk-GB@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb

Reply via email to