Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Import from Ushahidi Libya Instance

2011-06-13 Thread Richard Weait
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Mikel Maron  wrote:
>> My thought: Incompatible sources are incompatible.  "Good intentions"
>> do not trump incompatible sources.
>
> Wasn't thinking that because it was doing something for good, that
> automatically made it clean data :)
>
> Really curious how "substantial" might apply on sources, as we've explicitly
> said that use of OSM data in insubstantial ways does not trigger the
> virality of the license.

I see "insustantial" as something that the license can offer to
consumers of OSM data, not something that OSM can use as an excuse for
including incompatible data.  One might argue that anything done by
the OSM community is at least "systematic" and while possibly
insubstantial point by point, "substantial" when taken as a whole.
Incompatible sources are a temptation that conscientious mappers must
avoid at every turn.  Again, just my opinion.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk


Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Import from Ushahidi Libya Instance

2011-06-13 Thread Mikel Maron



> My thought: Incompatible sources are incompatible.  "Good intentions"
> do not trump incompatible sources.

Wasn't thinking that because it was doing something for good, that 
automatically 
made it clean data :)

Really curious how "substantial" might apply on sources, as we've explicitly 
said that use of OSM data in insubstantial ways does not trigger the virality 
of 
the license.
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk


Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Import from Ushahidi Libya Instance

2011-06-13 Thread Richard Weait
On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Mikel Maron  wrote:
> Legal-talk, any opinions or insights on this question?
>
> == Mikel Maron ==
> +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>
> 
> From: Mikel Maron 
> To: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
> Sent: Thu, May 26, 2011 5:18:11 PM
> Subject: Import from Ushahidi Libya Instance
>
> You may be aware, UN OCHA has been coordinating a Ushahidi instance to map
> reports from the the Libya Crisis. http://libyacrisismap.net/. OSM is the
> base map.
>
> They've geocoded about 150 places and POI, and have recruited OSM folks to
> conflate this list with OpenStreetMap.
> http://internal.libyacrisismap.net/volunteers/team-geolocation/coordinates-database
>
> The issue is that the source for the geocoding is listed, but not always
> licensed under a license compatible with OSM.
>
> Even if locations were derived from non-compatible license sources, my
> thinking has been that this is "non-substantial and non-systematic", and
> therefore might be permissible to import. Data is only collected based on
> select needs to geocode reports. The numbers are just over 150. According to
> the Substantial Guideline of the ODbL, an extract from OSM like this would
> not trigger the viral terms of the license.
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Substantial_-_Guideline
>
> Question is then twofold. One, we haven't yet adopted the ODbL, so how much
> could a guideline apply. And two, how does the concept of non-substantial
> apply to importing data? I think there's a good chance it's ok, in which
> case all data could be brought in. The alternative would then be to exempt
> particular POI from conflation, or simply geocode them again using fully
> clear sources.

My thought: Incompatible sources are incompatible.  "Good intentions"
do not trump incompatible sources.

___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk


Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Import from Ushahidi Libya Instance

2011-06-13 Thread Mikel Maron
Legal-talk, any opinions or insights on this question?

 == Mikel Maron ==
+14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron





From: Mikel Maron 
To: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
Sent: Thu, May 26, 2011 5:18:11 PM
Subject: Import from Ushahidi Libya Instance


You may be aware, UN OCHA has been coordinating a Ushahidi instance to map 
reports from the the Libya Crisis. http://libyacrisismap.net/. OSM is the base 
map.

They've geocoded about 150 places and POI, and have recruited OSM folks to 
conflate this list with OpenStreetMap.
http://internal.libyacrisismap.net/volunteers/team-geolocation/coordinates-database


The issue is that the source for the geocoding is listed, but not always 
licensed under a license compatible with OSM.

Even if locations were derived from non-compatible license sources,  my 
thinking 
has been that this is "non-substantial and non-systematic",  and therefore 
might 
be permissible to import. Data is only collected based on select  needs to 
geocode reports. The numbers are just over 150. According  to the Substantial 
Guideline of the ODbL, an extract from OSM like this  would not trigger the 
viral terms of the license.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Substantial_-_Guideline
 
Question  is then twofold. One, we haven't yet adopted the ODbL, so how much 
could a guideline apply. And two, how  does the concept of non-substantial 
apply 
to importing data? I think there's a good chance it's  ok, in which case all 
data could be brought in. The alternative would then be to exempt particular 
POI 
from conflation, or  simply geocode them again using fully clear sources.

Thoughts?
Mikel

 == Mikel Maron ==
+14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk


[OSM-legal-talk] Import from Ushahidi Libya Instance

2011-05-26 Thread Mikel Maron
You may be aware, UN OCHA has been coordinating a Ushahidi instance to map 
reports from the the Libya Crisis. http://libyacrisismap.net/. OSM is the base 
map.

They've geocoded about 150 places and POI, and have recruited OSM folks to 
conflate this list with OpenStreetMap.
http://internal.libyacrisismap.net/volunteers/team-geolocation/coordinates-database


The issue is that the source for the geocoding is listed, but not always 
licensed under a license compatible with OSM.

Even if locations were derived from non-compatible license sources,  my 
thinking 
has been that this is "non-substantial and non-systematic",  and therefore 
might 
be permissible to import. Data is only collected based on select  needs to 
geocode reports. The numbers are just over 150. According  to the Substantial 
Guideline of the ODbL, an extract from OSM like this  would not trigger the 
viral terms of the license.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Substantial_-_Guideline
 
Question  is then twofold. One, we haven't yet adopted the ODbL, so how much 
could a guideline apply. And two, how  does the concept of non-substantial 
apply 
to importing data? I think there's a good chance it's  ok, in which case all 
data could be brought in. The alternative would then be to exempt particular 
POI 
from conflation, or  simply geocode them again using fully clear sources.

Thoughts?
Mikel

 == Mikel Maron ==
+14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk