Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Taiwan Open Government Data License
I think you are misunderstanding my concern. Naturally we are not negating that there may be cases in which we are liable for damages because a court comes to the conclusion that we negligent in one way or the other, but that would be in court where we have a chance to defend ourselves against such a claim (or more likely in which we would negotiate a settlement). My only question is if the 2nd part of 6.3 does not essentially amount to an agreement to indemnify the "Data Providing Organisation" in situations in which we wouldn't be able to defend ourselves against the claim of "wrongful misconducting". "The same reimbursement rule for wrongful misconducting shall be applied to the User when the damaged one is a third party and the compensations have already been disbursed by the Data Providing Organization to the third party due to a legal claim." IMHO a local Taiwanese counsel needs to answer the question, it is not a question of my interpretation. Simon PS: CC BY is not compatible with the ODbL, see https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/ for more information Am 17.05.2017 um 07:03 schrieb Rex Tsai: > Hi, > > Since the open data on data.gov.tw from Taiwan government > covers only Taiwan, I assumed that any legal case will be following > Taiwan law and Taiwan Civil Code. > > On your concern, "does useful things with the data" does not mean > a mapper can just import the data negligently. I believe any import > process or routing algorithms should be designed and implemented > carefully. > > In Article 184 of Taiwan Civil Code[1], it said: > "A person, who violates a statutory provision enacted for the protection > of others and therefore prejudice to others, is bound to compensate for > the injury, EXCEPT NO NEGLIGENCE IN HIS ACT CAN BE PROVIDED." > > In the license[2] clause 6.2, it also removes the liable for damage claims > from "Data Providing Organisation". > > 6.2. The Data Providing Organization shall not be liable for damage or > loss User encounters when he/she makes use of the Open Data provided > under the License. This disclaimer applies as well when User has third > parties encountered damage or loss and thus has been claimed for > remedies. Unless otherwise specified according to law, the Data > Providing Organization SHALL NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FO > ANY DAMAGES OR COMPENSATIONS HEREIN. > > I read that as warning said the data importer is responsible if he/she > intentionally messed up with the data, or not give warning notice about > the risks of routing algorithms > > If you don't feel comfortable about the terms, the Open Government > Data License also allow the data to be licensed under Creative Commons > Attribution License 4.0 International in clause 4.2. > > [1] http://law.moj.gov.tw/Eng/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=B001 > [2] http://data.gov.tw/license#eng > Cheers > -Rex > > 2017-05-17 2:25 GMT+08:00 Simon Poole : >> Good to see that 6.3 at least raised half an eye brow with the OKFN, >> they seem to however chosen the most harmless interpretation possible, >> my reading would be that it could be equivalent to a hold >> harmless/indemnification clause. Now for probably 99.9% of OKFNs >> audience the concerns are probably irrelevant, but OpenStreetMap: >> >> - does useful things with the data >> >> - distributes the data as Open Data further so that other people and >> organisations can do useful things with it >> >> Useful things include maps, routing and so on. As a result the exposure >> to something going wrong can be quite large, and the scenario in which >> the "Data Providing Organisation" makes a pay out to a US Tourist suing >> everybody in sight for whatever mishap and then tries to recover the >> money by trying to get it from us is not so far fetched. Article 184 is >> naturally fairly standard fare as legislation goes, but I'm at a bit of >> a loss seeing were that ties in to the 2nd part of 6.3 which would make >> us liable for damage claims that we could not directly defend ourselves >> against. >> >> Simon >> >> >> Am 16.05.2017 um 13:23 schrieb Rex Tsai: >>> Hi, >>> >>> "Open Government Data License Taiwan 1.0" just has been approved as >>> Open Definition Conformant License[1] last month. >>> >>> There were some discussion[2] about clause 6.3, it does not impose any >>> additional agreement nor does it impose any restrictions, but a >>> reminding and a corresponding clause to Article 184 of Taiwan Civil >>> Code[3]. >>> >>> We also discussed the issue of 3.2, when I proposed to include NLSC tile >>> into editor-layer-index[4]. However, as the local community does not >>> have a registered legal entity, we don't have a written agreement on the >>> attribution requirement. >>> >>> If you like to import the data from data.gov.tw, please kindly follow >>> the import process, so we can notify the copyright holder for the >>> requested attribution. >>> >>> [1] http://opendefinition.org/licenses/ >>> [2] >>> https://discuss.okfn.org/t/lic
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Taiwan Open Government Data License
I will be happy to proceed according to Rex's instructions, but not until Simon says it is OK. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Taiwan Open Government Data License
Hi, Since the open data on data.gov.tw from Taiwan government covers only Taiwan, I assumed that any legal case will be following Taiwan law and Taiwan Civil Code. On your concern, "does useful things with the data" does not mean a mapper can just import the data negligently. I believe any import process or routing algorithms should be designed and implemented carefully. In Article 184 of Taiwan Civil Code[1], it said: "A person, who violates a statutory provision enacted for the protection of others and therefore prejudice to others, is bound to compensate for the injury, EXCEPT NO NEGLIGENCE IN HIS ACT CAN BE PROVIDED." In the license[2] clause 6.2, it also removes the liable for damage claims from "Data Providing Organisation". 6.2. The Data Providing Organization shall not be liable for damage or loss User encounters when he/she makes use of the Open Data provided under the License. This disclaimer applies as well when User has third parties encountered damage or loss and thus has been claimed for remedies. Unless otherwise specified according to law, the Data Providing Organization SHALL NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FO ANY DAMAGES OR COMPENSATIONS HEREIN. I read that as warning said the data importer is responsible if he/she intentionally messed up with the data, or not give warning notice about the risks of routing algorithms If you don't feel comfortable about the terms, the Open Government Data License also allow the data to be licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 International in clause 4.2. [1] http://law.moj.gov.tw/Eng/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=B001 [2] http://data.gov.tw/license#eng Cheers -Rex 2017-05-17 2:25 GMT+08:00 Simon Poole : > Good to see that 6.3 at least raised half an eye brow with the OKFN, > they seem to however chosen the most harmless interpretation possible, > my reading would be that it could be equivalent to a hold > harmless/indemnification clause. Now for probably 99.9% of OKFNs > audience the concerns are probably irrelevant, but OpenStreetMap: > > - does useful things with the data > > - distributes the data as Open Data further so that other people and > organisations can do useful things with it > > Useful things include maps, routing and so on. As a result the exposure > to something going wrong can be quite large, and the scenario in which > the "Data Providing Organisation" makes a pay out to a US Tourist suing > everybody in sight for whatever mishap and then tries to recover the > money by trying to get it from us is not so far fetched. Article 184 is > naturally fairly standard fare as legislation goes, but I'm at a bit of > a loss seeing were that ties in to the 2nd part of 6.3 which would make > us liable for damage claims that we could not directly defend ourselves > against. > > Simon > > > Am 16.05.2017 um 13:23 schrieb Rex Tsai: >> Hi, >> >> "Open Government Data License Taiwan 1.0" just has been approved as >> Open Definition Conformant License[1] last month. >> >> There were some discussion[2] about clause 6.3, it does not impose any >> additional agreement nor does it impose any restrictions, but a >> reminding and a corresponding clause to Article 184 of Taiwan Civil >> Code[3]. >> >> We also discussed the issue of 3.2, when I proposed to include NLSC tile >> into editor-layer-index[4]. However, as the local community does not >> have a registered legal entity, we don't have a written agreement on the >> attribution requirement. >> >> If you like to import the data from data.gov.tw, please kindly follow >> the import process, so we can notify the copyright holder for the >> requested attribution. >> >> [1] http://opendefinition.org/licenses/ >> [2] >> https://discuss.okfn.org/t/license-approval-request-open-government-data-license-taiwan-1-0/4593/12 >> [3] http://law.moj.gov.tw/Eng/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=B001 >> [4] https://github.com/osmlab/editor-layer-index/pull/255 >> [5] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines >> >> Cheers >> -Rex >> >> On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 05:49:46AM +0800, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote: >>> OK thanks Simon for the clarification! >>> I'll ask the participants of >>> https://www.facebook.com/groups/odtwn/permalink/1927450013936074/?comment_id=1927539973927078 >>> and >>> https://discuss.okfn.org/t/license-approval-request-open-government-data-license-taiwan-1-0/4593/12 >>> to chime in here to get this straightened out! >>> "SP" == Simon Poole writes: >>> SP> As has already been pointed out 3.2 could be problematic. The >>> SP> translation is a bit wobbly and unclear, but if I understand it >>> SP> correctly the intent is to reference a data set specific attribution >>> SP> requirement that would naturally have to be looked at for any specific >>> SP> data use. >>> >>> SP> The really killer is however 6.3 (which should have a different section >>> SP> header) which I suspect is incompatible with the Open Definition and a >>> SP> lot of other stuff (including common sense :-))
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Taiwan Open Government Data License
Good to see that 6.3 at least raised half an eye brow with the OKFN, they seem to however chosen the most harmless interpretation possible, my reading would be that it could be equivalent to a hold harmless/indemnification clause. Now for probably 99.9% of OKFNs audience the concerns are probably irrelevant, but OpenStreetMap: - does useful things with the data - distributes the data as Open Data further so that other people and organisations can do useful things with it Useful things include maps, routing and so on. As a result the exposure to something going wrong can be quite large, and the scenario in which the "Data Providing Organisation" makes a pay out to a US Tourist suing everybody in sight for whatever mishap and then tries to recover the money by trying to get it from us is not so far fetched. Article 184 is naturally fairly standard fare as legislation goes, but I'm at a bit of a loss seeing were that ties in to the 2nd part of 6.3 which would make us liable for damage claims that we could not directly defend ourselves against. Simon Am 16.05.2017 um 13:23 schrieb Rex Tsai: > Hi, > > "Open Government Data License Taiwan 1.0" just has been approved as > Open Definition Conformant License[1] last month. > > There were some discussion[2] about clause 6.3, it does not impose any > additional agreement nor does it impose any restrictions, but a > reminding and a corresponding clause to Article 184 of Taiwan Civil > Code[3]. > > We also discussed the issue of 3.2, when I proposed to include NLSC tile > into editor-layer-index[4]. However, as the local community does not > have a registered legal entity, we don't have a written agreement on the > attribution requirement. > > If you like to import the data from data.gov.tw, please kindly follow > the import process, so we can notify the copyright holder for the > requested attribution. > > [1] http://opendefinition.org/licenses/ > [2] > https://discuss.okfn.org/t/license-approval-request-open-government-data-license-taiwan-1-0/4593/12 > [3] http://law.moj.gov.tw/Eng/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=B001 > [4] https://github.com/osmlab/editor-layer-index/pull/255 > [5] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines > > Cheers > -Rex > > On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 05:49:46AM +0800, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote: >> OK thanks Simon for the clarification! >> I'll ask the participants of >> https://www.facebook.com/groups/odtwn/permalink/1927450013936074/?comment_id=1927539973927078 >> and >> https://discuss.okfn.org/t/license-approval-request-open-government-data-license-taiwan-1-0/4593/12 >> to chime in here to get this straightened out! >> >>> "SP" == Simon Poole writes: >> SP> As has already been pointed out 3.2 could be problematic. The >> SP> translation is a bit wobbly and unclear, but if I understand it >> SP> correctly the intent is to reference a data set specific attribution >> SP> requirement that would naturally have to be looked at for any specific >> SP> data use. >> >> SP> The really killer is however 6.3 (which should have a different section >> SP> header) which I suspect is incompatible with the Open Definition and a >> SP> lot of other stuff (including common sense :-)). >> >> SP> Simon >> > ___ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Taiwan Open Government Data License
Hi, "Open Government Data License Taiwan 1.0" just has been approved as Open Definition Conformant License[1] last month. There were some discussion[2] about clause 6.3, it does not impose any additional agreement nor does it impose any restrictions, but a reminding and a corresponding clause to Article 184 of Taiwan Civil Code[3]. We also discussed the issue of 3.2, when I proposed to include NLSC tile into editor-layer-index[4]. However, as the local community does not have a registered legal entity, we don't have a written agreement on the attribution requirement. If you like to import the data from data.gov.tw, please kindly follow the import process, so we can notify the copyright holder for the requested attribution. [1] http://opendefinition.org/licenses/ [2] https://discuss.okfn.org/t/license-approval-request-open-government-data-license-taiwan-1-0/4593/12 [3] http://law.moj.gov.tw/Eng/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?PCode=B001 [4] https://github.com/osmlab/editor-layer-index/pull/255 [5] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines Cheers -Rex On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 05:49:46AM +0800, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote: > OK thanks Simon for the clarification! > I'll ask the participants of > https://www.facebook.com/groups/odtwn/permalink/1927450013936074/?comment_id=1927539973927078 > and > https://discuss.okfn.org/t/license-approval-request-open-government-data-license-taiwan-1-0/4593/12 > to chime in here to get this straightened out! > > > "SP" == Simon Poole writes: > > SP> As has already been pointed out 3.2 could be problematic. The > SP> translation is a bit wobbly and unclear, but if I understand it > SP> correctly the intent is to reference a data set specific attribution > SP> requirement that would naturally have to be looked at for any specific > SP> data use. > > SP> The really killer is however 6.3 (which should have a different section > SP> header) which I suspect is incompatible with the Open Definition and a > SP> lot of other stuff (including common sense :-)). > > SP> Simon > ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Taiwan Open Government Data License
OK thanks Simon for the clarification! I'll ask the participants of https://www.facebook.com/groups/odtwn/permalink/1927450013936074/?comment_id=1927539973927078 and https://discuss.okfn.org/t/license-approval-request-open-government-data-license-taiwan-1-0/4593/12 to chime in here to get this straightened out! > "SP" == Simon Poole writes: SP> As has already been pointed out 3.2 could be problematic. The SP> translation is a bit wobbly and unclear, but if I understand it SP> correctly the intent is to reference a data set specific attribution SP> requirement that would naturally have to be looked at for any specific SP> data use. SP> The really killer is however 6.3 (which should have a different section SP> header) which I suspect is incompatible with the Open Definition and a SP> lot of other stuff (including common sense :-)). SP> Simon ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Taiwan Open Government Data License
As has already been pointed out 3.2 could be problematic. The translation is a bit wobbly and unclear, but if I understand it correctly the intent is to reference a data set specific attribution requirement that would naturally have to be looked at for any specific data use. The really killer is however 6.3 (which should have a different section header) which I suspect is incompatible with the Open Definition and a lot of other stuff (including common sense :-)). Simon Am 25.04.2017 um 01:38 schrieb 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson: > What do you folks think about > http://data.gov.tw/license#eng ? > Can we use that data? > > ___ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Taiwan Open Government Data License
Yes I wrote the legal questions people week ago but nobody replied. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Taiwan Open Government Data License
Yes I asked legal-questions a week ago and no one answered. Perhaps someone could ask them for me. Thanks. > "KL" == Kathleen Lu writes: KL> Hi Dan, KL> The English version, at least, appears less restrictive than CC BY 4.0, and KL> closer to the Canada Open Government License. The license is not specific KL> as to the type of attribution required. KL> The conservative route, is, as Frederik said, to ask the agency if KL> attribution on the osm.org/copyright webpage is acceptable. If it is, then KL> I see no other barriers to using the data. You might also ask the opinion KL> of the Licensing Working Group at legal-questions at osmfoundation.org KL> Best, KL> Kathleen ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Taiwan Open Government Data License
Hi Dan, The English version, at least, appears less restrictive than CC BY 4.0, and closer to the Canada Open Government License. The license is not specific as to the type of attribution required. The conservative route, is, as Frederik said, to ask the agency if attribution on the osm.org/copyright webpage is acceptable. If it is, then I see no other barriers to using the data. You might also ask the opinion of the Licensing Working Group at legal-questi...@osmfoundation.org Best, Kathleen On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 4:34 AM Frederik Ramm wrote: > Hi, > > On 04/25/2017 01:38 AM, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote: > > What do you folks think about > > http://data.gov.tw/license#eng ? > > Can we use that data? > > Not without further clarification. The way in which we would use the > data could be seen as violating their 3.2: "[The user] must make an > explicit notice of statement as attribution requested in the Exhibit > below by the Data Providing Organization". We *can* make such an > explicit notice on our osm.org/copyright page but we cannot ensure that > anyone who downloads our data or who looks at our map sees that notice. > We have to ask them if that kind of notice is enough. > > This is a similar issue as we always have with CC-BY licensed data. > > Bye > Frederik > > -- > Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" > > ___ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Taiwan Open Government Data License
Hi, On 04/25/2017 01:38 AM, 積丹尼 Dan Jacobson wrote: > What do you folks think about > http://data.gov.tw/license#eng ? > Can we use that data? Not without further clarification. The way in which we would use the data could be seen as violating their 3.2: "[The user] must make an explicit notice of statement as attribution requested in the Exhibit below by the Data Providing Organization". We *can* make such an explicit notice on our osm.org/copyright page but we cannot ensure that anyone who downloads our data or who looks at our map sees that notice. We have to ask them if that kind of notice is enough. This is a similar issue as we always have with CC-BY licensed data. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33" ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk