Re: [talk-au] ODbL data.gov.au permission granted
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 2:48 AM, 80n <80n...@gmail.com> wrote: > Andrew, that's great that you've had a response from AGIMO. Yes it is, I made sure to thank them for this. > Would it be possible for you to share a copy of their response with this > group? I've made a similar request to Grant about his "explicit, express > permission" and it seems reasonable to ask you the same question. > > Sadly, we really need first hand documentary evidence for any claim, either > way, to have any value. Below I quote the response from the data.gov.au team which I received: >OpenStreetMap (OSM) are utilising datasets made available from data.gov.au >under CC-BY 2.5 or CC-BY 3.0 only. They are required to attribute the authors >correctly, which they now are through their Wiki. This provides an appropriate >chain of attribution, in accordance with Creative Commons licensing, for any >end user of OSM products. > >In the example you provided, you as end user would be obliged to attribute >OSM when you used the extracted data. They, in turn, are obliged to attribute >the original government dataset. We do not consider that what we are providing >is “special permission” – we have only clarified our position on appropriate >attribution. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ODbL data.gov.au permission granted
On 27 September 2011 12:09, 80n <80n...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thank you, Andrew. > > I wonder if Grant received a similar answer but interpreted it in a > different way. Grant? > Hi 80n, yes the responses will be forthcoming. We are waiting on some further clarifications. LWG also now only meet fortnightly. 80n, why the interest in Australian gov data licensing? Or maybe we'll never know. ;-) / Grant ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ODbL data.gov.au permission granted
On 27 September 2011 11:22, Andrew Harvey wrote: > > Below I quote the response from the data.gov.au team which I received: > >>OpenStreetMap (OSM) are utilising datasets made available from data.gov.au >>under CC-BY 2.5 or CC-BY 3.0 only. They are required to attribute the authors >>correctly, which they now are through their Wiki. This provides an >>appropriate >>chain of attribution, in accordance with Creative Commons licensing, for any >>end user of OSM products. >> >>In the example you provided, you as end user would be obliged to attribute >>OSM when you used the extracted data. They, in turn, are obliged to attribute >>the original government dataset. We do not consider that what we are providing >>is “special permission” – we have only clarified our position on appropriate >>attribution. > Andrew, could you share the text of the questions + examples asked? It has an impact on the 2nd paragraph of their response. Regards Grant ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ODbL data.gov.au permission granted
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 9:58 PM, Grant Slater wrote: > Andrew, could you share the text of the questions + examples asked? It > has an impact on the 2nd paragraph of their response. My complete query which they replied to was: Hi, I see someone representing OpenStreetMap who claims that the AGIMO has given OpenStreetMap special permissions regarding the use of some of various agencies data on data.gov.au: http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2011-September/008453.html I would like to confirm if this is actually the case, and if so can I ask why the AGIMO has given OpenStreetMap privileged special permissions? I would ask that the AGIMO grant the same conditions to everyone by a public license to anyone by dual licensing the data under the current CC license in dual with the license given to OpenStreetMap. >We have been careful to point out that (under ODbL) we are not asking >folks who make visual maps from OpenStreetMap to provide secondary >attribution to each and every contributor, so would not be in >compliance with the CC-BY Australia 2.5 and 3.0 license their data is >normally provided under. They have raised no objection to this. Regarding the above point, this means that people who use the data from data.gov.au which they have obtained through OpenStreetMap, won't be required to attribute the original government authority, only OpenStreetMap. e.g. I could extract all the centerlink locations from OpenStreetMap (which OSM pulled from data.gov.au) and then use that data in a map without attributing the Commonwealth of Australia, or any other government agency. If you are going to grant this permission to OpenStreetMap, please grant it to the rest of us, ie. don't require attribution (because that is what it seems you have allowed OpenStreetMap to do by giving special privilege to them). ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ODbL data.gov.au permission granted
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Andrew Harvey wrote: > On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 2:48 AM, 80n <80n...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Andrew, that's great that you've had a response from AGIMO. > > Yes it is, I made sure to thank them for this. > > > Would it be possible for you to share a copy of their response with this > > group? I've made a similar request to Grant about his "explicit, express > > permission" and it seems reasonable to ask you the same question. > > > > Sadly, we really need first hand documentary evidence for any claim, > either > > way, to have any value. > > Below I quote the response from the data.gov.au team which I received: > > >OpenStreetMap (OSM) are utilising datasets made available from > data.gov.au > >under CC-BY 2.5 or CC-BY 3.0 only. They are required to attribute the > authors > >correctly, which they now are through their Wiki. This provides an > appropriate > >chain of attribution, in accordance with Creative Commons licensing, for > any > >end user of OSM products. > > > >In the example you provided, you as end user would be obliged to attribute > >OSM when you used the extracted data. They, in turn, are obliged to > attribute > >the original government dataset. We do not consider that what we are > providing > >is “special permission” – we have only clarified our position on > appropriate > >attribution. > Thank you, Andrew. I wonder if Grant received a similar answer but interpreted it in a different way. Grant? Perhaps we'll never know 80n ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] ODbL data.gov.au permission granted
On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 12:53 PM, Grant Slater wrote: > On 27 September 2011 12:09, 80n <80n...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Thank you, Andrew. > > > > I wonder if Grant received a similar answer but interpreted it in a > > different way. Grant? > > > > Hi 80n, yes the responses will be forthcoming. We are waiting on some > further clarifications. LWG also now only meet fortnightly. > Grant If you have "explicit special permission" why do you seek further clarification? Was it not explicit enough? Perhaps you'd be kind enough to publish the text of the permission you have received. We can then see for ourselves. > > 80n, why the interest in Australian gov data licensing? Or maybe we'll > never know. ;-) > I'm interested in all matters relating to OSM licensing. Particularly statements that might encourage contributors to damage the provenance of OSM by submitting content that infringes other people's rights. As you know the value of OSM is that it is (largely) unencumbered by contributions from sources that reserve copyright. While some people may have lower standards than others, anything that increases the amount of infringing material in OSM needs to be resisted. Your unattributed statements are likely to be damaging unless you provide the documentary evidence to back them up. At first you claim to have "explicit special permission" but now you are back pedalling and seeking clarification. It would have been much better, and would *still* be much better, if you were to just publish what you received verbatim. Is there some reason why you are unwilling or unable to do this? 80n ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
