On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Mikel Maron <mikel_ma...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Legal-talk, any opinions or insights on this question?
>
> == Mikel Maron ==
> +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>
> ________________________________
> From: Mikel Maron <mikel_ma...@yahoo.com>
> 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

Reply via email to