Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Warning about not mapping military areas

Am Di., 22. Dez. 2020 um 10:12 Uhr schrieb Edward Bainton < bainton@gmail.com>: > > Dangerous: I think there's a risk that by saying, "please follow local > laws" (rather than saying nothing), we open ourselves to accusations of not > policing "our" mappers properly. You can imagine the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Removal of 'unsuitable' content from an OSM-related site

sent from a phone > On 2. Dec 2020, at 11:15, Nick Whitelegg wrote: > > I don't have any terms of service - as a non-profit/research project it's all > quite informal consider setting up some simple terms, even short ones, where you deny all responsibility, liability and guarantee and

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Removal of 'unsuitable' content from an OSM-related site

IANAL, but why do you believe you could have any obligation to host their content on your server? Do you have terms of service? Cheers Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OdbL: Section 4.6, Does data/methods have to be released on public Produced Work?

sent from a phone > On 28. Oct 2020, at 16:19, Kathleen Lu wrote: > > Actually quality scores would be not be subject to sharealike, per the > Collective Database Guideline. Why does the collective database guideline apply? Aren‘t they coloring OpenStreetMap derived data? To me this looks

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OdbL: Section 4.6, Does data/methods have to be released on public Produced Work?

sent from a phone > On 27. Oct 2020, at 22:15, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk > wrote: > > Again, not conducting a comprehensive survey here, but if 95% of the polygons > match OSM polygons, then even if there is technically a derivative database, > then I think this simply isn't worth our time

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Changeset Comments Copyright

Am Do., 24. Sept. 2020 um 12:05 Uhr schrieb Tom Hughes : > On 24/09/2020 10:18, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > > > it contains changesets, notes, etc. but not diary posts or changeset > > comments (correct me if I’m wrong). > > You're wrong: > > https://planet.openst

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Changeset Comments Copyright

sent from a phone > On 24. Sep 2020, at 02:41, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk > wrote: > > I read "geo-database contributions" as including changeset comments & > discussions and map notes, because they are tied to the map features. I do > not think geo-database contributions include blog

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Changeset Comments Copyright

sent from a phone > On 23. Sep 2020, at 14:43, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk > wrote: > So if changeset comments did not count as part of the geo-database, OSM would > not have rights to use them, which would be contrary to the purposes of the > Contributor Terms. looking at the terms, to my

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Changeset Comments Copyright

Am Mi., 23. Sept. 2020 um 12:25 Uhr schrieb GITNE : > > > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/5/58/OSM_DB_Schema_2016-12-13.svg > Martin, please correct me if I am wrong but the database represented by the > schema you have pointed to is not what is actually publicly available, > that is >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Changeset Comments Copyright

Am Mi., 23. Sept. 2020 um 11:02 Uhr schrieb Christoph Hormann < chris_horm...@gmx.de>: > ... That changeset data > is distributed separately from other parts of our database is not an > argument against it being covered by the contributor terms. Frequent > discussion in the OSM community that

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM compatibility of licenses which restrict modification

sent from a phone > On 14. Jul 2020, at 15:28, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > Maybe they assume that it is covered > anyway by moral rights? > > But ODBL waives moral rights if allowed > by law, > it attempts to block asserting such claims, > and so on. > > Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer etc

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM compatibility of licenses which restrict modification

sent from a phone > On 14. Jul 2020, at 12:40, Mateusz Konieczny via legal-talk > wrote: > > Such data is incompatible with > OSM requirements, must not be > imported, must be removed as > copyright violation if added already. on the plus side there is a declaration of the license steward

[OSM-legal-talk] OSM compatibility of licenses which restrict modification

In recent local discussions it has emerged that some license has conditions for the reuse of the data, which may eventually not be completely compatible with OSM. In particular it relates to an Italian license which states as a condition you have to "not reuse the Information in a way that

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM Data in wikidata

Am Mi., 17. Juni 2020 um 10:19 Uhr schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer < dieterdre...@gmail.com>: > Am Di., 16. Juni 2020 um 16:00 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via > legal-talk : > >> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Copyright >> > > ... ultimately

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM Data in wikidata

Am Di., 16. Juni 2020 um 16:00 Uhr schrieb Mateusz Konieczny via legal-talk : > See https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikilegal/Database_Rights > > > Whenever possible, the best course is to use only content that is made > > available by the author under an open license. In particular, for EU > >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM Data in wikidata

Am Di., 16. Juni 2020 um 13:58 Uhr schrieb Simon Poole : > > I'm simply making no assumptions about how the data got into wikidata, for > example the users may be contributing to both (OSM and WD). > I have checked for the data in the Rome area that a fair amount was contributed to OSM by the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM Data in wikidata

Am Di., 16. Juni 2020 um 13:32 Uhr schrieb Simon Poole : > (not discussing if the material added is even protected > to start with). As you are mentioning it, are you in doubt? By the substantial guideline it seems it would be covered by the ODbL:

[OSM-legal-talk] OSM Data in wikidata

I have noticed that people have been importing OSM data into wikidata. Here are some examples: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q76939332 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q76951022 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q76972551 This is a link that someone helpful has provided in the user talk page of the

[OSM-legal-talk] Adding OSM-ids to an external database and publish in CC-BY

In Italy we have been discussing this situation: a member of the community wants to add links to OSM objects into a list of specific shops (those that are open during the covid-19 pandemia). The list will be published here: https://www.covid19italia.help/opendata/ with an CC-BY-4.0 license. The

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

sent from a phone > On 21. Dec 2019, at 03:22, Kathleen Lu wrote: > > Remember that it's a "substantial part...of the contents of a database" (in > this case OSM), and one way would be a very very small part of OSM. If “substantial“ has to be seen in relation to the size of the database it

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

sent from a phone > On 21. Dec 2019, at 03:01, Kathleen Lu wrote: > > No, the guideline was explicitly about both individual results and > aggregations. Individual results are insubstantial, so no ODbL obligations > attach at all (attribution is one of the ODbL obligations). while an

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

sent from a phone > On 20. Dec 2019, at 08:04, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > Obviously, both nodes, ways and > relations should be counted. > > Otherwise one would be able to > temporarily create one relation, > that would include all data (s)he > wish to use and export this. and if you

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

sent from a phone > On 20. Dec 2019, at 00:16, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk > wrote: > > This is not what the Substantial Guideline says. It says that fewer than 100 > features is "not Substantial". It also gives as an example "More that 100 > Features only if the extraction is

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

sent from a phone > On 17. Dec 2019, at 01:35, Kathleen Lu wrote: > > >> >> To create an accurate postcode polygon from point features you will need a >> lot of them, so probably already a handful of them would be considered >> substantial. > > This logic seems backwards. Since it

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

sent from a phone > On 17. Dec 2019, at 01:11, matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de wrote: > > I think, that's a moralistic point of view. I'll neither collect a > substantial part > of the whole OSM database, nor you could proof that there was big investment > made to > collect the data. Since

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

sent from a phone > On 17. Dec 2019, at 00:04, Kathleen Lu wrote: > > But what that says is not just "create a new database" but one "that contains > the whole or a substantial part of the original OSM database." His new > database will contain very little if any of the original OSM

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

sent from a phone >> On 16. Dec 2019, at 22:09, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk >> wrote: > That's what the guidelines are for! > We can't cover every possible example because there are too many, but as I > already said, I think your usecase is covered by the Geocoding Guideline. >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

Am Mo., 16. Dez. 2019 um 16:03 Uhr schrieb < matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de>: > Now, I neither can use your data, nor add my dataset to yours. A > lose-lose-situation :-( > the problem is that "your dataset" is not yours, otherwise you could add it, and you could also decide whether to use

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

Am Mo., 16. Dez. 2019 um 03:19 Uhr schrieb < matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de>: > Okay, I'll canceld all plans to use OpenStreetMap for this task. > I've contacted several commercial data providers and hope to get offers > tomorrow. > > I didn't expected OpenStreetMap to be such non-free and

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

sent from a phone > On 13. Dec 2019, at 19:56, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > I'll have to ponder this for a while, it changes some assumptions I had > made. It would mean that, for example, a database that contains a count > of all pubs in each municipality, -> adaptation > or a database

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

sent from a phone > On 13. Dec 2019, at 19:32, matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de wrote: > > So as soon I'm selecting any data using OSM polygons, it gets transformed OSM > data? > They're not even touching on the same layer, since it's a different feature > type. if you modify your data

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

Am Do., 12. Dez. 2019 um 19:53 Uhr schrieb < matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de>: > But I neither want to merge OSM data or add it to my data. I just want to > use it to > select points of my dataset. then it may eventually fall under the geocoding guideline:

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

Am Do., 12. Dez. 2019 um 08:01 Uhr schrieb < matthias.straetl...@buerotiger.de>: > I want to use polygons (district boundaries) from OSM dataset to select > points for a proprietary dataset. >From a practical point of view, boundaries in OSM rarely originate from surveys, you might be lucky to

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] use OSM data to select proprietary data

sent from a phone > On 12. Dec 2019, at 08:19, Frederik Ramm wrote: > > As an exception to the above, if the number of boundaries you use is > less than 100 - an crucially this could be after the trivial alterations > you mention - then the extract you are making is considered not to be >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ZIP codes from OSM in non-compatible licensed dataset

Am Do., 10. Okt. 2019 um 23:25 Uhr schrieb Kathleen Lu via legal-talk < legal-talk@openstreetmap.org>: > Cost is a relevant factor in database protection law, which is one of the > rights covered by the licence. First, a database is not protected unless > there has been "substantial investment"

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ZIP codes from OSM in non-compatible licensed dataset

sent from a phone > On 7. Oct 2019, at 19:48, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk > wrote: > > In my view, if you are keeping the two zip codes in different columns and not > removing duplicates, then essentially what you have is one property that is > "OSM ZIP" and one property that is

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Copy information from official business website (WAS: Proposal for a revision of JA:Available Data)

sent from a phone > On 12. Jul 2019, at 11:37, Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > > For example I may draw a red circle > and publish it under CC BY-NC. > > But drawing of a red circle is not copyrightable, > as it is to simple to qualify for protection > and lacks originality. it may depend on

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Copy information from official business website (WAS: Proposal for a revision of JA:Available Data)

sent from a phone > On 11. Jul 2019, at 20:23, Kathleen Lu wrote: > > "Substantial investment" may not be a black and white standard, but it is a > meaningful one. I hypothesize that Tesco would have difficulty proving "a > substantial investment in either the obtaining, verification or

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Copy information from official business website (WAS: Proposal for a revision of JA:Available Data)

sent from a phone > On 10. Jul 2019, at 18:35, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk > wrote: > > I do not think that a retail store chain could successfully argue that it > makes a "substantial investment" in maintaining a list of its own stores' > hours. Since the store sets the hours, the effort

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] How to get geolocation without problem into Wikidata

Am Mi., 15. Mai 2019 um 10:19 Uhr schrieb Shu Higashi : > Thanks, Martin and Kathleen. > > I will let wikidata people know the operation as I described 1-4 > and tell them to be sure not to be engaged in "systematic attempt to > aggregate" > in order to avoid share-alike triggering. from my

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] How to get geolocation without problem into Wikidata

sent from a phone > On 14. May 2019, at 00:14, Kathleen Lu via legal-talk > wrote: > > If by "Each wikidata people repeat this operation manually." you mean that > each individual Wikipedia editor makes their own decision about whether to > copy the lat/long, and it is not a coordinated or

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] How to get geolocation without problem into Wikidata

provided you do it for a substantial part of OpenStreetMap data, from my understanding you would trigger ODbL, i.e. you would be creating a derivative database. https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Substantial_-_Guideline Cheers, Martin

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using OpenData from Geoinformationservice Germany Rheinland-Pfalz

Am Sa., 9. März 2019 um 15:14 Uhr schrieb Bernhard Schmitz < bernhard.schmi...@web.de>: > is it legal to use the geoinformationdata from the > geoinformationistitute Rheinland-Pfalz Germany for house numbering and > buildings in OSM? > > Link to the opendata maps and orthophotos: > >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] How to stop violation of OSM copyright by Mapbox?

to me it seems you did represent facts, although I am not sure I would see the click-to-see attribution on small screens a violation of copyright, I agree it is suspicious that there is space for a mapbox logo but not for an OSM attribution. Cheers, Martin

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using screenshots from OpenStreetMap

Hello Tony, you don't need to buy a license (and more generally, it is impossible), but you will have to attribute the background image to OpenStreetMap if you publish or distribute your application (i.e. from what you write it seems you will have to). See here for more information:

[OSM-legal-talk] artist using osm data

There is an artist who makes (generally big scale (up to global), sometimes small scale) drawings on maps by connecting either place centre nodes (cities, towns, villages) or sometimes features (e.g. hotels, bridges, etc.). The resulting lines make up the art work. These lines are in the vast

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-dev] Legal question about attribution text on smartphone

sent from a phone > On 23. Apr 2017, at 00:26, Stadin, Benjamin > wrote: > > (UIActionSheet on iOS) As a side note UIActionSheet is deprecated since iOS8 (2014) Cheers, Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-dev] Legal question about attribution text on smartphone

sent from a phone > On 21. Apr 2017, at 12:10, Rory McCann wrote: > > So I dunno? Maybe? There could be ways around it if you don't want to include > it on every map page. Does your app have a loading/spash screen? Including an > attribution there, which is shown every

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using closed sources to spot errors (was: [Tagging] Routing in Liège (consulting Michelin))

sent from a phone > Il giorno 21 set 2016, alle ore 09:54, Janko Mihelić ha > scritto: > > and only show which OSM data is wrong according to the closed source. Then > mappers would go survey the shop. Would this be OK? I am not sure if publishing the differences would

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using copyrighted data to locate objects in bing (and trace over bing)

sent from a phone > Il giorno 25 ago 2016, alle ore 21:41, Bjoern Hassler > ha scritto: > > The use: I'm interested in locating megalithic structures, but only where > those are visible on Bing. I am not interested in copying anything from the > map to OSM that I

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] osm-carto license

sent from a phone > Il giorno 25 ago 2016, alle ore 11:32, Christoph Hormann > ha scritto: > > You can still render tiles using the standard style and OSM data > yourself and distribute them under something other than CC-By-SA as > long as you comply with the ODbL.

[OSM-legal-talk] osm-carto license

I'm wondering about the license of the "main official map style" and the tiles it creates and whether current license indications make sense. In the style sheet the license is indicated as CC0: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/blob/master/LICENSE.txt But on the website it

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] attributive data enrichment using OSM

sent from a phone > Il giorno 22 lug 2016, alle ore 14:46, Stefan Jäger ha > scritto: > > My question now is: if we enrich our data (with only underlying attributes, > no geometry from OSM at all) with such a process using OSM data, is this then > a produced work (or a

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] School Units Data Resources in Greece

sent from a phone > Il giorno 21 lug 2016, alle ore 11:43, Νίκος Σταματόπουλος > ha scritto: > > a) Is it legal to use public data although it is not strictly stated as > CC, GPU or other License? > if there is no license the default is full copyright and

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Australian Government Data from data.gov.au

sent from a phone > Il giorno 30 giu 2016, alle ore 13:15, Christoph Hormann > ha scritto: > > The whole idea to me seems completely impractical. +1 what we might do: add an auto generated list of all osm user pseudonyms with at least one edit at the bottom of the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Australian Government Data from data.gov.au

2016-06-30 12:47 GMT+02:00 Tobias Wendorff : > > Do you always have to attribute once something got imported, even if > there > > a no (visual) traces of this import any more? E.g. you could say that all > > following contributions built on what was there at a

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Australian Government Data from data.gov.au

2016-06-29 23:58 GMT+02:00 Tobias Wendorff <tobias.wendo...@tu-dortmund.de>: > Am Mi, 29.06.2016, 23:46 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: > > Is there still need to attribute the original creator? > > In my opinion that's what CC-BY is all about. You're allowed to change >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Australian Government Data from data.gov.au

sent from a phone > Il giorno 29 giu 2016, alle ore 23:26, Tobias Wendorff > ha scritto: > > Oh come on, that's no valid argument. A script can handle this and > output the source of the data imported into this area. Nobody would > need to analyse the data on

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Australian Government Data from data.gov.au

sent from a phone > Il giorno 29 giu 2016, alle ore 22:49, Tobias Wendorff > ha scritto: > > "(C) OpenStreetMap, with subsets of data.gov.au, BKG Germany & xyz" just that this list becomes very long, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

sent from a phone > Am 13.03.2016 um 13:47 schrieb Tobias Wendorff > : > > "If the published result of your project is intended for the extraction > of the original data, then it is a database and not a Produced Work." shouldn't this go further and include

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Do overlays have to be released under ODbL?

sent from a phone > Am 13.03.2016 um 13:11 schrieb Tobias Wendorff > : > > This would mean: If I show parking facilities for bikes as an GPX or > GeoJSON overlay as a layer an top of the OpenStreetMap base tiles, > which might already included existing

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

sent from a phone > Am 13.03.2016 um 13:01 schrieb Tobias Wendorff > : > > I'm seeing a problem in the formulation: it might be not correct to call > a map a "produced work" anymore. what other things besides maps can be produced from our db? Not many (yes,

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ECJ confirmed 96/9/EG for printed maps

sent from a phone > Am 13.03.2016 um 11:39 schrieb Tobias Wendorff > : > > There needs to be a revision of the ODbL to cleary state, what's a > printed map. From the legal site, it's not a "produced work" by the > old meaning anymore. I believe it has always

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] new wiki page ODbL compatibility of common licenses

2016-01-19 10:38 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole : > As has been pointed out here before CC-BY 4.0 is essentially a completely > new license (compared to previous CC-BY versions) and potentially is not > "fixable", definitely it is not just a question of getting permission to > attribute on

[OSM-legal-talk] new wiki page ODbL compatibility of common licenses

Following a thread on the OSMF-talk list, I am kindly asking you to review and improve a new wiki page that tries to give an overview about the compatibility of common licenses with the ODbL and CT: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/ODbL_Compatibility Feel free to modify and improve this

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] new wiki page ODbL compatibility of common licenses

2016-01-18 16:21 GMT+01:00 Robert Whittaker (OSM lists) < robert.whittaker+...@gmail.com>: > Some comments / suggestions: > > thank you for your comments. > * In the notes column, it might be better to say "rights holder(s)" > rather than "licensor" since the former is presumably the only >

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Proposed "Metadata"-Guideline

thank you Michal, I see it now. I have finally discovered that I cannot contribute much to this list and apologize for having caused disruption from time to time, I'm unsubscribing, see you on the other lists ;-) Cheers, Martin ___ legal-talk mailing

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Proposed "Metadata"-Guideline

2015-10-13 21:08 GMT+02:00 Frederik Ramm : > rankly, if there was a halfway usable repository of open > addresses that could be merged with OSM for those who want it, and if > open addresses become available for regions where OSM already has > addresses, I'd not be opposed to

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] When should ODbL apply to geocoding

sent from a phone > Am 24.09.2015 um 11:23 schrieb Frederik Ramm : > > > I would hesitate to apply this rule for making a selection that can not > be repeated ("select reverse geocoding results for this non-public list > of coordinates and store them in my non-public

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Proposed "Metadata"-Guideline

Is there a problem with the current license? Is it not clear from a legal point of view, how it should be interpreted? I must admit I feel some reluctance towards the practise of introducing more and more examples and guidelines how to interpret the legal text, because every additional word is

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Proposed "Metadata"-Guideline

2015-09-21 12:43 GMT+02:00 Simon Poole : > I have to say that I'm not completely happy with the document as is, > however nobody has come up with anything better. It will definitely need > some more examples in a final version. > I don't believe that the restaurant star rating

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Travel Channel + OSM

2015-02-25 9:51 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole si...@poole.ch: If they want we won't sue you reassurance the proper place to ask is legal-questi...@osmfoundation.org out of curiosity, how many people have been sued in the past 11 years of OpenStreetMap? ;-) cheers, Martin

[OSM-legal-talk] Use of OSM Data in Apple Maps

As many of you may already be aware of, Apple is supposedly using ODbL data from OSM after their recent update, in their iOS App Maps, together with other data (some of which proprietary, some public domain) and appearently also together with older data from OSM (pre-license change). They still

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Use of OSM Data in Apple Maps

2014-11-24 19:26 GMT+01:00 Michael Kugelmann michaelk_...@gmx.de: Am 24.11.2014 17:21, schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer: As many of you may already be aware of, Apple is supposedly using ODbL data from OSM after their recent update, in their iOS App Maps, together with other data (some of which

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Contents Licence for OSM Data

2014-11-02 23:11 GMT+01:00 Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: We have no significant third party ODbL data releases due to OSM share alike to show for Actually the Italian Government has designed their open data license (IODL) to be compatible with OdbL:

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

2014-11-03 0:17 GMT+01:00 Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: 2014-10-29 20:56 GMT+01:00 Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: Updated: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Open_Data_License%2FGeocoding_-_Guidelinediff=1102233oldid=1076215 wouldn't it make more sense to come to a conclusion here

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

2014-11-03 15:05 GMT+01:00 Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 8:56 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: where in one of the first paragraphs there is this unproven claim: Geocoding Results are a Produced Work by the definition of the ODbL (section 1

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

2014-10-29 20:56 GMT+01:00 Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: Updated: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Open_Data_License%2FGeocoding_-_Guidelinediff=1102233oldid=1076215 wouldn't it make more sense to come to a conclusion here before updating the wiki? cheers, Martin

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Contents Licence for OSM Data

2014-10-29 12:32 GMT+01:00 SomeoneElse li...@mail.atownsend.org.uk: What I read was MapBox pays some bloke called Kevin doesn't seem to be a nobody in this field though: Kevin is the Executive Director of the Centre for Spatial Law and Policy and a lawyer focusing on the unique legal and

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Contents Licence for OSM Data

2014-10-29 13:47 GMT+01:00 Sachin Dole sd...@genvega.com: ... if there was lot more clarity. I imagine, ..., that contributors and other stakeholders might also benefit from commercial users if the license is clear that only data gathered from OSM be shared alike leaving derivative or

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

Il giorno 30/lug/2014, alle ore 16:44, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com ha scritto: your lawyers did really say according to their understanding a pair of coordinates is similar to an image or a video, hence a work? Yeah, there's no definition of 'work' in the ODbL, just a non-exclusive list

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

Am 28/lug/2014 um 09:07 schrieb Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: Our lawyers' advice is captured in the guideline as shared and posted in this revision: your lawyers did really say according to their understanding a pair of coordinates is similar to an image or a video, hence a work? The

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

Am 24/lug/2014 um 23:03 schrieb Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: In this example, the database powering the geocoder is a derived database. The geocoding results are produced works, which are then collected into what forms a derivative database as part of a collective database. Not following

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

2014-07-15 18:01 GMT+02:00 Michal Palenik michal.pale...@freemap.sk: btw, cp planet.osm.bz2 planet.png creates a produced work... LOL I'd doubt this, because an image is likely not to be read like in disk image, and not every file with an png extension will be considered an image...

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

2014-07-14 20:26 GMT+02:00 Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com: Just like how CC-BY-SA created a grey area around the SA implications for the rendered map which wasn't good for OSM, ODbL does the same with permanent geocoding. To make OSM viable for geocoding we can't have its ODbL infecting the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Updated geocoding community guideline proposal

Am 11/lug/2014 um 16:41 schrieb Michal Palenik michal.pale...@freemap.sk: so wording As Geocodes are a Produced Work, they do not trigger the share-alike clauses of the ODbL. is totally against section 4.6. +1 the data contained in produced works remains ruled by ODbL / share alike, this

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Imports] N50 imports from Kartverket (The Norwegian Mapping Authority)

Am 21/giu/2014 um 23:03 schrieb Paul Norman penor...@mac.com: As a reminder, CC BY 3.0 and earlier are incompatible for reasons related to the attribution requirements. can you expand on this? I remember there are already heaps of data with these licenses (cc-by 3.0 and older) in OSM.

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] The edges of share-alike on data Re: Attribution

2014-05-05 14:05 GMT+02:00 Tobias Knerr o...@tobias-knerr.de: *And share-alike only applies to what we collect.* Let me first say that this is a brilliantly clear way to put it. I like this a lot. I believe this is somehow more limiting than what we actually might want. E.g. we don't

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] The edges of share-alike on data Re: Attribution

2014-05-05 17:42 GMT+02:00 Jean-Marc Liotier j...@liotier.org: Usage may be different, but the data is the same: ways with an hypothetical 'speed' attribute added to them in the persistent database of your choice. Whether you use that joined data to perform Dijkstra stunts or just render it

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Creative Commons license question

Am 04/mag/2014 um 08:44 schrieb Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz: An organisation is making a short film/video which will be released CC-BY. They want to show (fleetingly) OSM map tiles ... which are CC-BY-SA- 2.0. Can they do that? Is this different to publishing a book (full

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Attributing OpenStreetMap at Mapbox

2014-04-30 20:48 GMT+02:00 Richard Weait rich...@weait.com: I feel that the attribution that you currently use provides insufficient recognition for OpenStreetMap. there was also a discussion one year ago on a similar topic (attribution by an icon instead by a text) to which I'd like to

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Upload of copyrighted map images from OSM to Facebook

A user on the Italian Mailing List posted this link concerning Facebook's integration of Wikipedia content into the so-called facebook community pages: https://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/21721 In this case they achieved to retain the cc-by-sa attribution and all backlinks to Wikipedia.

[OSM-legal-talk] Upload of copyrighted map images from OSM to Facebook

Following the German Blog there was a post today referencing this forum thread: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=411611#p411611 where the contributors come to the conclusion that uploading OSM map images to Facebook is against the osm maps license (cc-by-sa). It looks as if they

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Upload of copyrighted map images from OSM to Facebook

2014-04-15 18:59 GMT+02:00 Richard Weait rich...@weait.com: What do you suggest, Martin? contact Facebook and if they are not willing to make an exception to their terms we'll have to delete our accounts there (seems to be the only way to remove images according to their terms). In case of

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Upload of copyrighted map images from OSM to Facebook

2014-04-15 19:22 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com: 2014-04-15 18:59 GMT+02:00 Richard Weait rich...@weait.com: What do you suggest, Martin? contact Facebook and if they are not willing to make an exception to their terms we'll have to delete our accounts there (seems

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Upload of copyrighted map images from OSM to Facebook

2014-04-15 19:59 GMT+02:00 Clifford Snow cliff...@snowandsnow.us: OSMF only has two photos posted. We can easily remove the map and the logo. I think we can keep the logo as it is protected as a registered brand, but even if you remove the map image from our page they will continue to have

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using Google Street View to perform virtual survey

2014-04-08 10:39 GMT+02:00 Simon Poole si...@poole.ch: @Martin It is undoubtedly so that the information in question is -not- simply available for use. You need to invest the time and effort to actually go out and collect it. Google has done so and that we should respect, regardless of

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using Google Street View to perform virtual survey

Am 07/apr/2014 um 19:57 schrieb Simon Poole si...@poole.ch: forgetting the ethical side of it (do we really want to use data collected by somebody that doesn't want us to do so?), from an ethical point of view you could also see it like this: as the information (geographic facts) in the

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using Google Street View to perform virtual survey

Am 07/apr/2014 um 02:24 schrieb Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com: You can always file for a declaratory judgment: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaratory_judgment interesting, wouldn't it be a good idea to try this for deriving facts from google sat or street view? On the other

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Copyright of old media / images / maps

2014-04-05 6:01 GMT+02:00 Andreas Labres l...@lab.at: Below the line the question is: was the act of reproducing that thing an act of creation (Akt der Schöpfung im Sinne des Urheberrechts; also mit der nötigen Schöpfungshöhe). This is usually granted for a photography. The copyright status

  1   2   >