I don't think OSMF will change this requirement, as the reasons for the waiver are detailed in the blog post Mateusz linked to, https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/ are pretty compelling.
There had been some hope that CC BY 4.0 sources would be directly > compatible with the ODbL. But while neither CC nor the OSMF has undertaken > a complete compatibility analysis, we have identified at least one point > of incompatibility and one possible challenge regarding attribution that > lead us to our decision to continue to ask for explicit permission to use > BY 4.0-licensed material in the OSM project. This is the best path forward. If you would like a second voice for your enquiry with Gold Coast, feel free to loop me in. On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 at 07:34, Graeme Fitzpatrick <graemefi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 at 21:02, Andrew Harvey <andrew.harv...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Sun, 15 Sep 2019 at 18:05, Mateusz Konieczny <matkoni...@tutanota.com> >> wrote: >> >>> See https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/ >>> >>> CC BY 4.0 requires waiver >>> >>> The additional text is confirmation that it is >>> actually released under this licence >>> and that personal confirmation is not required. >>> >> >> Exactly. >> >> I reached out to Greg Payne, Director of Land and Spatial Information, >> Topographic Data, Imagery and Mapping, DNRM in December 2018 (in case >> anything had changed since my prior correspondence), the reply was: >> >> The Department’s position has not changed since your previous enquiry. >>> >>> Consistent with Queensland Government policy, our data is provided under >>> a CC:BY 4.0 Licence. The department will not provide the data under an >>> ODbl licence. It is our belief that a CC:BY licence is sufficient for use >>> of our data and we do not accept that OpenStreetMap cannot use our data >>> under the CC:BY licence. >> >> >> So unfortunately we're in a stalemate, OSMF says we need a waiver, DNRME >> says they don't believe we need one. So we can't currently use DNRME's CC >> BY 4.0 open data within OpenStreetMap unless either OSMF or DNRME change >> their stance. >> >> I'm not taking a stab at DNRME over this, they are free to no agree to >> the waiver, it's their call. >> > > Thanks both of you. > > Exactly the same position with my on-going discussions with Gold Coast > City Council - they've given us explicit permission to use their data, but > can't get their head around our need for a waiver as well? > > " unless ... OSMF ... change their stance" - any chance / likelihood of > that happening? > > Thanks > > Graeme >
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
