Hi everyone,
Thanks for your prompt replies. I'll send them a mail asking for explicit permission then. If I get a positive reply, I'll involve the import and talk-us lists before proceeding. Best, Jan > > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message: 1 >Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 13:41:45 +0200 >From: Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> >To: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org >Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Houston, TX, open data policy license > compliance >Message-ID: <f1dea99a-cce2-ddd0-a3cc-4642dfd10...@poole.ch> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >While the policy is undoutably good, it does not follow that all data >published actually conforms to it (for example third party rights in >existing data could be an issue). > >In any case on data.houstontx.gov the licence is specified for 7 >datasets, so I assume the intent is to do that for all over time (you >should ask). > >The related problem is that you will need to obtain a waiver for CC BY >material as CC BY is in many ways more restrictive than the ODbL (see >https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/). > >Simon > >Am 13.08.2019 um 08:24 schrieb JS: >> Hi everyone, >> >> The city of Houston has published several open data sets at >> data.houstontx.gov and cohgis-mycity.opendata.arcgis.com/. While the >> data sets and open data websites do not contain any licensing-related >> text, there's a general open data policy at >> http://www.houstontx.gov/adminpolicies/8-7.html. >> >> Am I right to assume that this policy, in particular the definition >of >> "open data" at No 6, is sufficiently clear so as to use the data >> without further permission? >> >> Thanks for your opinions! >> >> Best, >> Jan >> -- >> Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> legal-talk mailing list >> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >-------------- next part -------------- >An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >URL: ><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20190813/9fea741b/attachment-0001.html> >-------------- next part -------------- >A non-text attachment was scrubbed... >Name: signature.asc >Type: application/pgp-signature >Size: 488 bytes >Desc: OpenPGP digital signature >URL: ><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20190813/9fea741b/attachment-0001.sig> > >------------------------------ > >Message: 2 >Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 14:42:55 -0700 >From: Kathleen Lu <kathleen...@mapbox.com> >To: "Licensing and other legal discussions." > <legal-talk@openstreetmap.org> >Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Houston, TX, open data policy license > compliance >Message-ID: > <cafekdnbkj2w8wt_rpub6aogtrtjslqtnzbqbdnnk87-xs6t...@mail.gmail.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Hi Jan, >Specifically, here's is an example of the Geographic Boundaries page >that >indicates a CC-BY license: >http://data.houstontx.gov/group/geographic-boundaries >On the left side, at the bottom of the list of information. I would >surmise >that this applies to all the geographic boundary datasets, but you can >ask >them for clarification. >Best, >Kathleen > >On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 4:43 AM Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote: > >> While the policy is undoutably good, it does not follow that all data >> published actually conforms to it (for example third party rights in >> existing data could be an issue). >> >> In any case on data.houstontx.gov the licence is specified for 7 >> datasets, so I assume the intent is to do that for all over time (you >> should ask). >> >> The related problem is that you will need to obtain a waiver for CC >BY >> material as CC BY is in many ways more restrictive than the ODbL (see >> https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/). >> >> Simon >> Am 13.08.2019 um 08:24 schrieb JS: >> >> Hi everyone, >> >> The city of Houston has published several open data sets at >> data.houstontx.gov and cohgis-mycity.opendata.arcgis.com/. While the >data >> sets and open data websites do not contain any licensing-related >text, >> there's a general open data policy at >> http://www.houstontx.gov/adminpolicies/8-7.html. >> >> Am I right to assume that this policy, in particular the definition >of >> "open data" at No 6, is sufficiently clear so as to use the data >without >> further permission? >> >> Thanks for your opinions! >> >> Best, >> Jan >> -- >> Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> legal-talk mailing >listlegal-talk@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >> >> _______________________________________________ >> legal-talk mailing list >> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >> >-------------- next part -------------- >An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >URL: ><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20190813/fd1859ca/attachment-0001.html> > >------------------------------ > >Message: 3 >Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 16:30:06 -0700 >From: Kathleen Lu <kathleen...@mapbox.com> >To: "Licensing and other legal discussions." > <legal-talk@openstreetmap.org> >Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Houston, TX, open data policy license > compliance >Message-ID: > <cafekdndjspchbbtuyky6ru3wtzn7qd7cw0eoi53pttzcicr...@mail.gmail.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >Ah, apologies, Jan, I was too hasty in my assessment. If you click on >the >CC-BY link, you will see that only the "School District" dataset is >CC-BY. >If you do inquire, I would first ask if the dataset you are interested >in >is in the public domain, as that is possible under US law, and would be >most fitting for the description of open data in >http://www.houstontx.gov/adminpolicies/8-7.html as "freely used, shared >and >built-on by anyone, anywhere, for any purpose." >And to Simon's point about third-party rights, while there are no >guarantees, the policy does mention "Exempt Data" as including data to >which there are contractual limitations, so it appears that the city at >least made some effort to exclude third-party data from open data. >-Kathleen > >On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 2:42 PM Kathleen Lu <kathleen...@mapbox.com> >wrote: > >> Hi Jan, >> Specifically, here's is an example of the Geographic Boundaries page >that >> indicates a CC-BY license: >> http://data.houstontx.gov/group/geographic-boundaries >> On the left side, at the bottom of the list of information. I would >> surmise that this applies to all the geographic boundary datasets, >but you >> can ask them for clarification. >> Best, >> Kathleen >> >> On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 4:43 AM Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote: >> >>> While the policy is undoutably good, it does not follow that all >data >>> published actually conforms to it (for example third party rights in >>> existing data could be an issue). >>> >>> In any case on data.houstontx.gov the licence is specified for 7 >>> datasets, so I assume the intent is to do that for all over time >(you >>> should ask). >>> >>> The related problem is that you will need to obtain a waiver for CC >BY >>> material as CC BY is in many ways more restrictive than the ODbL >(see >>> https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/). >>> >>> Simon >>> Am 13.08.2019 um 08:24 schrieb JS: >>> >>> Hi everyone, >>> >>> The city of Houston has published several open data sets at >>> data.houstontx.gov and cohgis-mycity.opendata.arcgis.com/. While the >>> data sets and open data websites do not contain any >licensing-related text, >>> there's a general open data policy at >>> http://www.houstontx.gov/adminpolicies/8-7.html. >>> >>> Am I right to assume that this policy, in particular the definition >of >>> "open data" at No 6, is sufficiently clear so as to use the data >without >>> further permission? >>> >>> Thanks for your opinions! >>> >>> Best, >>> Jan >>> -- >>> Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail >gesendet. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> legal-talk mailing >listlegal-talk@openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> legal-talk mailing list >>> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org >>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk >>> >> >-------------- next part -------------- >An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >URL: ><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20190813/955b75bf/attachment-0001.html> > >------------------------------ > >Message: 4 >Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 02:10:41 -0700 >From: Michael Patrick <geodes...@gmail.com> >To: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org >Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] legal-talk Digest, Vol 144, Issue 7 >Message-ID: > <cac54+e6y7t6-er_6qszh-fw4ze_baxeyhjbqogb23hcm4yl...@mail.gmail.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > >> > Am I right to assume that this policy, in particular the definition >of >> "open data" at No 6, is sufficiently clear so as to use the data >without >> further permission? >> >> No, it's not. It is a 'policy', not a license. The site says " City >of >Houston GIS(COHGIS) data is prepared and made available for general >reference purposes only", and you (OSM) would be re-publishing and >redistributing. Sometimes, GIS-ish data is supplied to cities by >vendors >with specific terms of use and redistribution, and those vendors are >allowed to sell the data to anyone else ( cost reduction strategy ). > >>From two Open Data Portals: > >*City of Seattle* has a notice in the dataset metadata:Terms of Use -* >Access constraints: *GISUSER_RO Account Access, Public access.*Use >constraints: *Reproduction/distribution of GIS data for commercial >purposes >is prohibited, unless expressly authorized through a separate licensing >agreement with The City of Seattle. Public use. >*King County*: King County data are made available with the >understanding >that they shall be used exclusively by the obtainer or his/her >authorized >agents. Digital products may not be reproduced or redistributed in any >form >or by any means without the express written authorization of King >County. >( both of these jurisdictions readily granted OSM's request, BTW ) > >Always ask. >-------------- next part -------------- >An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >URL: ><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20190814/4c1f5e52/attachment.html> > >------------------------------ > >Subject: Digest Footer > >_______________________________________________ >legal-talk mailing list >legal-talk@openstreetmap.org >https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > > >------------------------------ > >End of legal-talk Digest, Vol 144, Issue 8 >****************************************** _______________________________________________ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk