Re: [OSM-talk] Let's talk Attribution

At the risk of repeating others' words, I strongly encourage participants in this conversation to review the draft attribution guideline ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Draft_Attribution_Guideline) and previous conversations regarding attribution on this list. It would be hard to overstate

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

This seems similar to the problem discussed here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Metadata_Layers_-_Guideline The doctrine proposed by Richard Fairhurst (and discussed on that page) strikes me as reasonable. It's hard for me to see how OSM IDs could qualify as a substantial

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

> I was aware of this and just wanted to get a consensus by the data creators: the users. This is an admirable impulse, but it is worth emphasizing that those of us who participate on OSM listservs are a small and unrepresentative fraction of the project's 5.9 million registered users. Lists like

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Licensing question

> if the way you use the data is more in a database-like fashion or more in the form of a finished product ready for human consumption This raises more questions, doesn't it? I think everyone agrees that a map contained by a PNG file is a produced work. But such a file is merely a collection of

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] OSM for training ML machines

I'll defer to others on the finer points of how downstream or intermediate ML products fit into the licensing picture, but this did catch my eye: > If you need an example: Take a translator for geographic names trained > using OSM data. This translator in practical use will spit out names > or

Re: [Talk-us] State Open Data (Brian May)

> If a billionaire is reading this list and wants to put their money > towards doing a lot of public good and good for the economy in general > (data is the new oil), they could make the sky rain lawyers! I share your enthusiasm for billionaires with idiosyncratic obsessions (who doesn't like

Re: [OSM-talk] Is it technically and legally possible to add the Open Location Code to the OSM search?

I'm surprised to see that this conversation has made it past the weekend. Since it has, let me add my voice to those suggesting that encoding OLC in the database (or any other values that can be algorithmically derived from geometry) makes very little sense. I'm grateful to everyone who has

[Talk-us] keeping the National Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP) dataset open

The NAIP dataset is valuable for mapping in the continental US, so I suspect there are more than a few people on this list who share my alarm at the leaked proposal to move it to a licensed model. My colleague Charlie just

Re: [OSM-talk] Wikipedia/Wikidata admins cleanup

Like many conversations about Wikidata tagging, I think this one suffers from varying levels of stringency -- and perhaps letting the perfect become the enemy of the good. At the risk of stating the obvious, it is often the case that Wikidata's conceptual model of places does not exactly match

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] What types of sources can be listed that are OK to use for OSM?

James, I think your list of "definitely OK" sources is a good one. The rest of your list does a good job of reflecting how complex geodata rights can be. In most cases, OSM elects to use a conservative interpretation of the situation in order to avoid any possible danger to the project. I will

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] FYI Collective Database Guideline

> This is a desirable goal but don't forget there is another side to > that - if i as an entrepreneur consider contributing to the OSM > database it could be important for me that my contributions cannot be > used by the competition against my interests. Share-alike might play a > significant

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] licenses suitable for import

Tobias, the best option for ensuring the data is usable by OSM is an explicit statement of permission for the OpenStreetMap project to incorporate and use the data under the project's terms. This is generally considered preferable to a dataset that is ODbL-licensed without such a statement.

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

I think this conversation is suffering from a few confusions. First, the EU Database Right and copyright are related but distinct. One or both can apply to a work. From the ODbL: "Database Rights can apply even when there is no copyright over the Database." German copyright's notion of "fading"

Re: [OSM-talk] Not sure what to think

Google indexing a site, and your use of that index to find the site, does not taint the interaction between you and that site. If I trespass on private property on my way to buy groceries, the property owner might have a claim against me. But it is unlikely that they have any claim on my

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using a WMS imagery with CC-BY4.0

misunderstanding there, CC by is not going to be an >> option as long as we have a licence with a share-alike component. The >> only thing that we are discussing for now is attribution only input >> licences. >> >> Simon >> >> > if it were compatibl

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] NSW LPI permission

> > That said, the data they have released isn't raw data, it's only > > imagery + raster basemaps, not sure if that makes a difference. > > > >> It would therefore probably be safer if you could get > >> an explicit statement that they're happy for the data to be

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] NSW LPI permission

Andrew, I am not a member of the LWG, but insofar as: - questions regarding CC-BY 3.0's compatibility with ODbL hinge on the impracticality of downstream compliance with the license's attribution requirements in a geo context - the rightsholder has made it clear that they understand downstream

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

longs in OSM: the iD editor, paired with a microtasking tool and open imagery, would be a great way to put those points in their correct locations. On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 3:08 PM, Frederik Ramm <frede...@remote.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On 10/13/2015 06:12 PM, Tom Lee wrote: > >

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

nce Simon introduced. If I'm not mistaken, the LWG and larger community have acknowledged this to be an open issue for some time. On Wed, Oct 14, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Steve Coast <st...@asklater.com> wrote: > > > On Oct 14, 2015, at 8:30 AM, Tom Lee <t...@mapbox.com> wrote: > &

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

> I think I agree with everything but this - I still don’t think it’s good enough. Of course, I also want it to be better - but that cogent argument thing you mentioned is missing either way. I and many others have been investing considerable energy into the OpenAddresses project because of

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

people would be glad to dive into, if OSM was a better home for geocoding. On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 1:43 PM, Steve Coast <st...@asklater.com> wrote: > Tom > > Isn’t the problem one of imports? The debate on importing 200M points > would be entertaining. > > Steve > > On

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

Allow me to gently suggest that we try to keep this thread grounded in concrete concerns. I am always up for some flag-waving about sharealike versus PD, but I think it would be best housed in a new thread or the talk list (it's a general enough principle that the larger community deserves to

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using a WMS imagery with CC-BY4.0

dback yet? > > Simon > > > Am 14.07.2015 um 16:22 schrieb Tom Lee: > > I'll add that I've been in touch with CC's US affiliate and they've > expressed interest in resolving the compatibility question (either with > formal guidance that applies to 4.0 or in preparation for the next

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

> In a way I would actually support [geocoding results being considered non-substantive extracts] if geo-coding was a clearly and tightly defined process, which, as I've pointed out earlier, it isn't. Are you referring to this thread, Simon, or a larger conversation elsewhere? If the latter, I'd

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

> > 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 in your own database, then how in the > world could

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

> > why wouldn't you want to provide OSM with a list of addresses that you > tried to geo-code (successfully and non-successfully) To use an extreme but hopefully illustrative example, consider the queries used to create the thematic map on this page:

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Geocoding as produced work

gt; wrote: > > > Am 23.09.2015 um 15:32 schrieb Tom Lee: > > why wouldn't you want to provide OSM with a list of addresses that you >> tried to geo-code (successfully and non-successfully) > > > To use an extreme but hopefully illustrative example, consider the qu

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Geocoding as produced work

i...@poole.ch> wrote: > > > Am 23.09.2015 um 19:16 schrieb Tom Lee: > > I'm not sure what basis there is for thinking a service provider will > > necessarily reuse clients' data. Maybe! > Not "maybe" but dead certain, see for example geocoder.ca and I hope yo

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Geocoding as produced work

Thanks, Steve, for pushing this in a productive direction; and apologies to you, Simon for letting my frustration through. I should emphasize: I don't think that I'm suggesting a license change at all, and I don't mean to suggest that sharealike is broadly impractical. I'm suggesting that a

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] license test

This strikes me as a fair and useful framework. I'll take a crack at it, with geocodes-as-produced-works in mind: SPIRIT: Surely it's possible to avoid creating a sharealike backdoor by clarifying that geocodes become substantial only when combined to reverse engineer the map. HARM: The evidence

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

Martin, Is there a problem with the current license? Is it not clear from a legal point of view, how it should be interpreted? Correct--it's currently unclear how the license applies to many important use cases. Partly this is because it's untested: OSM is the only important user of ODbL (with

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

> Turning this around, when do you think share-alike should apply in a geocoding context? I think there are two goals that a successful geocoding guidance should meet: 1. Enable greater use of OSM data for geocoding, including scenarios in which sharealike provisions must not be applied (e.g.

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Legal status of certain mapping activities

Frederik's perspective on question 4 seems correct to me. Speaking imprecisely (by necessity, given national differences on these questions), IP rights attach to the creative form that expressions of fact take; and, in the EU, the collective form of those facts when arranged into a database. The

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] GADM license - any news?

If it would be useful, I'd be happy to try to get in touch with the GADM people. Sending emails like that is a substantial part of my workday :-) I would just need clarity around what, specifically, we'd like to ask for this time. Simone, the factual nature of geodata and its effect on copyright

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Legal requirements of permissions to import into OSM

Well, I'll withdraw the suggestion; I wasn't party to those conversations and I'm finding them to be essentially unsearchable due to the license transition conversations around CC-BY-SA. I will note that CC itself soft-pedaled the significance of the attribution change in 4:

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Legal requirements of permissions to import into OSM

Having spent a lot of time doing work like this at the Sunlight Foundation, I will suggest keeping things as simple as they can be, as Simon suggests. Efforts like opendatacommons.org are admirable, but for an overwhelmed or disengaged government, they still offer more detail than is desirable.

Re: [OSM-talk] Etsy

Steve, thanks for pushing on this. We had gotten in touch with Etsy about the missing attribution when we first noticed it, but your raising the issue helped to unblock those conversations. Etsy tells me that appropriate attribution should now be in place. There is one older product whose push

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using OSM data without modifying - are there any guidelines?

Which nicely illustrates that should the OSM database not be found to be worthy of sui generis database protection (a distinct possibility), the ODbL would clearly be enforceable based on contract law. Of course you're right that contracts can be used to create obligations outside of copyright

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using OSM data without modifying - are there any guidelines?

As the name of this list says it is legal talk (aka yapping without consequence) ... not get-help-from-the-OSMF I'm sorry to see this practice discouraged. The archive description[1] says this is the list for discussion of all legal matters relating to Openstreetmap, including licensing and

Re: [OSM-talk] Some thoughts against remote mapping

These critiques seem to be beginning to develop themes explored more fully and famously by James Scott in _Seeing Like A State_. In it, he explores the implications of government efforts at systematization, including the original French cadastre and some German forest management projects. I'm

Re: [OSM-talk] (licence of wikidata) was: Can wikidata links help fight name inflation?

As for OSM ID number, this falls under the so-called Fairhurst Doctrine and would not be considered Substantial under ODbL if and only if the community agrees and the OSMF endorses. At the risk of splitting hairs, I don't think the community/OSMF's sense of the substantial threshold is

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] What extra permissions are needed to include CC-BY data in OSM

Apologies for the delay in my response. Any sucess/feedback? Not from their general inquiry address; I've put another line in via a shared contact. I've been meaning to ask if you could clarify a bit further, and/or correct my understanding of the situation. You wrote: The actual

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] What extra permissions are needed to include CC-BY data in OSM

My, very conservative, reading of CC-BY 4.0 would indicate that it has additional issues over just the attribution problem for databases. CC-BY 4.0 contains the following (4.b): if You include all or a substantial portion of the database contents in a database in which You have Sui Generis

[OSM-ja] experience with Navitime.co.jp coordinate system?

I am still working to connect e-Stat data together into a shapefile of postal boundaries in Japan. I have found myself encountering data from services that use the navitime.co.jp mapping platform. These coordinates seem to employ an unusual datum. There are some references on the web to it being

Re: [OSM-ja] experience with Navitime.co.jp coordinate system?

it helps, Noashi Tabuchi (tabuchi_nao...@trek.co.jp) On 2015/02/25 4:06, Tom Lee wrote: I am still working to connect e-Stat data together into a shapefile of postal boundaries in Japan. I have found myself encountering data from services that use the navitime.co.jp http://navitime.co.jp/ mapping

Re: [OSM-ja] Japan post code polygons

://nlftp.mlit.go.jp/ksj/gml/datalist/KsjTmplt-P29.html code P29_006 is address column. But the notation for address is very messy. Anyone knows the geometory dataset with post-code? どなたか、郵便番号と住所 (と、緯度経度) が対になったOpenなデータセットをご存知ありませんか？ 2015-01-29 8:51 GMT+09:00 Tom Lee t...@mapbox.com

Re: [OSM-ja] Japan post code polygons

to be solved. I also don't have as much data (or familiarity with Japanese post codes) as I would like to test this hypothesis. Any advice will be much appreciated. http://i.imgur.com/JMYR09w.jpg Tom On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Tom Lee t...@mapbox.com wrote: I have been trying to find geometry

[osm-ve] Venezuelan address data

First: apologies for my use of English. I'm afraid it would be even more annoying if I tried to speak Spanish. Second: I wonder if anyone in the Venezuelan OSM community knows about address point data. I am seeking a source for this information so that it can be contributed to the

Re: [Talk-es] access to Spanish cadastre

del día: 1. access to Spanish cadastre (Tom Lee) 2. Re: access to Spanish cadastre (Agustín) 3. Re: access to Spanish cadastre (Cruz Enrique Borges Hernandez) -- Message: 1 Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2014 13:33:57 -0500

[Talk-es] access to Spanish cadastre

I've recently been researching Spain's cadastral database, which quickly led to the work done on cat2osm and other projects by people on this list. However, I find myself confused. I believe that links to bulk downloads of the data exist on this page:

Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Using description from wikipedia text (Tom Gregorovic)

Tom, Licenses like CC and ODbL can only apply to copyrighted material, which must generally be a specific creative expression in a fixed medium. You can't copyright facts, nor opinions. Assuming you don't have some crazy natural language processing workflow in mind, you'll only be using the

Re: [OSM-ja] Talk-ja まとめ読み, 80 巻, 8 号

. oogaki and kogaki wouldn't be serious, but I believe kogaki is a bit human- and machine-friendly; kogaki can easily be canonicalized into oogaki, but not vice versa. Hope it helps (and excuse me for a long post.) Regards, Noashi Tabuchi (tabuchi_nao...@trek.co.jp) (2014/10/12 1:25), Tom Lee

[OSM-ja] reconciling MLIT Shapefile with Japan Post CSV

the difference between the oogaki and kogaki files offered by Japan Post represent a concern. Please do not hesitate to ask questions or point out problems with my analysis. Tom Lee ___ Talk-ja mailing list Talk-ja@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org