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

On Wed, Sep 23, 2020 at 6:19 PM Andy Townsend wrote: > For those unfamiliar with it, the OSM US' Slack instance has a > "feed-changeset-comments" channel which shows new changeset discussion > comments shortly after they are added. There are lots of other ways of > getting at that data as well

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] local copyright law on government data and OSM license

Hi Kathleen, all, Just as a bit of reference, the original intellectual property law from 1924, back when the Philippines was a territory of the United States, didn't have this commercial-with-prior-approval second sentence and was basically modeled after the U.S. law (government works are fully

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] artist using osm data

On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 4:37 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: > Now the question is if using OSM data as canvas for his work will require > him to release it (or the data files with the drawings) under the ODbL. Do > you agree this kind of use is leading to produced works or

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Geocoding as produced work (was: Proposed "Metadata"-Guideline)

On 9/23/15, Tom Lee wrote: >> >> I mean, nobody cares about a single on-the-fly geocoding result (this >> easily falls under the "substantial" guideline) but if you repeatedly >> query an ODbL database with the aim of retrieving from it, say, a >> million lat-lon pairs to store

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Question using Wikipedia coordinates

Hi, If you got the coordinates of objects on your own without looking at Google Maps or other copyrighted sources, then you should be able to publish them on Wikipedia and on OpenStreetMap in parallel. But do not indicate Wikipedia as the source in OpenStreetMap. Please use source=survey or

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

On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 12:08 PM, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote: How would the Collective Database approach work if the OSM Database must remain unmodified to be part of a Collective Database? The definition of Collective Database seems to be tailored to use cases where the OpenStreetMap

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

On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote: This is a pure CC question. 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? I think fair

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

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:34 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: 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

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

On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.comwrote: Am 06/apr/2014 um 01:24 schrieb Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com: or if a court decision says *exactly* that it is OK to copy stuff for OSM. how would you get that decision if you didn't use the material

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

On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 11:50 PM, Paulo Carvalho paulo.r.m.carva...@gmail.com wrote: Dear fellow mappers, Let me present myself to you. I'm a OSM mapper from the Brazil community and a question rose there which caused a split in the group regarding Google Street View to perform virtual

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

FWIW, I agree with you that it should not be a case of copyright infringement to obtain uncopyrightable facts from copyroghted sources. Here's a blog post that even argues that it is OK to trace from Google's satellite imagery: http://www.systemed.net/blog/legacy/100.html But OSM does not

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

On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 12:02 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: Anybody can explain how it can be legal to claim copyright on old material, say 18th or 19th century works? When browsing the web (mostly library pages and catalogues) those institutions often claim full

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] propriety layer over OSM

Hi, As long as that proprietary layer has not been created based on OSM data, you are definitely good to go. However, if the data was created based on OSM data (for example, users add a marker on an OSM-based map and the marker was positioned relative to objects depicted on the OSM map), then

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Place name translations

On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 5:58 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer dieterdre...@gmail.com wrote: On 16/giu/2013, at 03:47, Erik Johansson erjo...@gmail.com wrote: While I agree with Richard, it might be interesting to know that Wikidata (a Wikimedia.de project) is licensed CC-0, and they copy data

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License question, user clicking on map

On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 10:58 PM, Olov McKie o...@mckie.se wrote: 1. If we present an OSM map to the user let them click on the map and use the coordinates they clicked on as part of the meta-data for a place in our application, will the resulting database be considered a derived database?

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licenses for Produced Works under ODbL

Hi Igor, I'd like to address a couple of points. On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:19 PM, Igor Brejc igor.br...@gmail.com wrote: Not one company will dare to give out their proprietary source code to someone, even if they release it under a very strict license. The risks of someone inadvertently then

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licenses for Produced Works under ODbL

Hi Igor, IANAL, so the following are just my opinions. On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 1:07 AM, Igor Brejc igor.br...@gmail.com wrote: They also don't really answer the question what is a Database. Let's take, for example, the statement Rendering databases, for example those produced by Osm2pgsql,

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [Talk-us] press from SOTM US

On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 4:12 AM, Alex Barth a...@mapbox.com wrote: And this is where SA gets really hairy. It's entirely possible and actually quite common that part of a database that contains private data is public. E. g. public facing web sites that are powered from a Salesforce DB

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Some questions about using ODbL Produced Work maps in Wikipedia

On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 3:04 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: If it were any different, you could team up with a co-publisher, publish your ODbL Produced Works to him and he forwards them to the world without you ever having to release anything. It would be a loophole that demands

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Critical Mass for license change-over

On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 7:11 AM, Mike Dupont jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote: I am just explaining the legal basis behind copyright and copyleft : Copyright says that I own all my work and you have no right to copy it, copyleft says you are allowed to copy it under certain conditions

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL and publishing source data

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: The European definition of a database is a collection of independent works, data or other materials arranged in a systematic or methodical way and individually accessible by electronic or other means. Individual pixels comprising

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL and publishing source data

On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 6:00 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: I see that you and Frederik disagreed here.  (FWIW I think he is right - a PNG file can clearly be seen as a database of pixel values.  It is an image too, and perhaps even a map or a photograph, but legally it would be hard to

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL and publishing source data

On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 12:31 AM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 4:17 PM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 6:00 AM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: I see that you and Frederik disagreed here.  (FWIW I think he is right - a PNG

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [talk-au] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap

On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:01 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 18 June 2011 00:54, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 10:44 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 18 June 2011 00:40, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org wrote: I am

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] PGS coastline

Isn't PGS in the public domain since it's a work of the US federal government and in addition was automatically generated from Landsat imagery, which is also in the public domain? On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 8:56 PM, OJ W ojwli...@googlemail.com wrote: My account used for importing PGS coastlines

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Are CT contributors are in breach of the CC-BY-SA license?

IANAL, but as long as the data is currently being released as CC-BY-SA, then there is no breach of the CC license. CC-BY-SA only stipulates that the data, when published, must be under CC-BY-SA. It doesn't say that you cannot enter contracts promising to release the data *in the future* under

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Rights granted to OSMF (Section 2 of the CT)

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 6:06 PM, ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen g.grem...@cetest.nl wrote: FSF, owner of GCC, has copyright assignment. On the other hand, OSMF's CT only has a rights grant (contributor still retains copyright on his own data), which is the same thing as what ASF's

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Are CT contributors are in breach of the CC-BY-SA license?

is made available via the OSM API (and the OSM Planet), then I believe there is no problem. On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 6:23 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: IANAL, but as long as the data is currently being released

[OSM-legal-talk] Rights granted to OSMF (Section 2 of the CT)

Some people have problems with section 2 of the proposed CT because of granting of rights to OSMF. Section 2 of CT 1.2.4[1]: [...] You hereby grant to OSMF a worldwide, royalty-free, non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable licence to do any act that is restricted by copyright, database right or

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Rights granted to OSMF (Section 2 of the CT)

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 1:00 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 17 April 2011 14:39, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: Clearly this is not that big a problem for Apache contributors, why should it be a big problem for OSM contributors (setting aside the desire

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Rights granted to OSMF (Section 2 of the CT)

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 1:25 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 17 April 2011 15:17, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: The point still stands. Granting rights to a central body (but not your copyright--you still retain that) is not unheard of in open communities

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Compliance timeline

On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 6:52 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 April 2011 20:38, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote: I believe that this is the (only) critical issue. To be open contributions need to be given freely and without restriction, so as to avoid the current

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Compliance timeline

On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com wrote: to transfer rights to the OSMF. But, you still own rights to the data you contributed (you can give it however you want to anybody else). You're just giving OSMF the permission to release your data as part of a database.

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY-SA / Non-separatable combination of OSM+other

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 4:02 AM, Peter Miller peter.mil...@itoworld.com wrote: On 2 February 2011 19:05, Rob Myers r...@robmyers.org wrote: On 02/02/2011 06:39 PM, Peter Miller wrote: Frederik has explained how it can be argued that BY-SA's private use exception allows online mash-ups.

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] Unsetting CT flag

I agree with Frederik's very nice comparison of OSM with volunteer organizations as well. I guess OSM should be viewed as a collection of geodata to which Frederik, John, Liz, Steve, Steve, Steve, Steve, Richard, Richard, Richard, et al have contributed to, instead of as a collection of

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] some interesting points from the bing license

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Andrew Harvey andrew.harv...@gmail.com wrote: Am I the only one that sees a problem with the legal foundation of tracing from Bing imagery? Take a look at how NearMap.com make their imagery available for tracing. On their website along with the their license of

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Bing - Terms of Use

On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 11:23 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 1:45 PM, Chris Fleming m...@chrisfleming.org wrote: On 01/12/10 08:52, Richard Fairhurst wrote: Andrew Harvey wrote: Just to clarify is this http://www.microsoft.com/maps/product/terms.html the document

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Fair use?

On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 12:55 AM, Prado, Renato (R.P.) rpr...@visteon.com wrote: Hello! Are you planning to just overlay your data over the background map as a separate and independent layer? If yes, then this would qualify as a collective work under CC and you just need to attribute OSM in

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licence Implementation plan - declines or non-responses

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 1:27 PM, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote: On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 2:03 AM, Eugene Alvin Villar sea...@gmail.com wrote: ...why should the onus of forking be on the license-change agreers? If this is indeed the case, then the ones

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licence Implementation plan - declines or non-responses

On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 10:22 PM, jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com jamesmikedup...@googlemail.com wrote: my question is, why dont you just make a fork for the new license and leave the rest of us to continue in peace? get the new system working and then we can talk about it. mike This

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-talk] ODbL vs CC-by-SA pros and cons

On Sun, Aug 29, 2010 at 7:22 AM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.comwrote: I wonder how Frederik is going to rationalise having the Kosovo information removed, another million objects that can be added in just a few weeks?

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] ODbL, CTs and tracing GPS tracks

On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 5:54 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Jukka Rahkonen jukka.rahko...@latuviitta.fi wrote: TimSC mapp...@... writes: Hi all, Apologies if this has been raised before, but I was wondering about GPS track data and licenses.

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 4:21 PM, Liz ed...@billiau.net wrote: On Sun, 8 Aug 2010, Frederik Ramm wrote: Imports are bad enough in the effect they have on the surveying community. You are welcome to join a 48,000 km kayak trip to survey the Australian coastline. However If there is

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] decision removing data

On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 8:20 PM, 80n 80n...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.orgwrote: 3. Each element is examined and only those with an unbroken history chain from version 1 to the most recent ODbL'ed version are marked as OK. Does anyone