I agree that neither side is likely change their position. Could we propose (to OSMF) new wording for an updated waiver that makes it clearer, the attribution half doesn't seem like a problem, its the second half which mentions ODbL even though the cover letter block explains it they aren't signing that page. When we were communicating with DNRM early last year they do appear to think that they need to relicense under the ODbL, and I can now sort of see how the waiver could be read that way.
Waiver: > [Entity] waives Section 2(a)(5)(B) of the CC BY 4.0 license as to OpenStreetMap and its > users with the understanding that the Open Database License 1.0 requires open access > or parallel distribution of OpenStreetMap CCBY4 Clause: > *No downstream restrictions*. You may not offer or impose any additional or different > terms or conditions on, or apply any Effective Technological Measures to, the > Licensed Material if doing so restricts exercise of the Licensed Rights by any recipient > of the Licensed Material. On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 11:16 AM Andrew Harvey <andrew.harv...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 at 11:07, Greg Lauer <gregory.la...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Just so I am clear on this issue. We are not asking DERM to change the >> current CC4 licence. We are asking DERM to give us formal permission to use >> the data. This can be as simple as an email from a responsible party at >> DERM giving us permission. Am I interpreting this correctly? >> > > We're not asking for them to license the data under ODBL or any other > license, we're asking for a waiver which provides one exception and one > clarifications to their data released under CC BY to ensure compatibility > with the ODBL license and clarification on how OpenStreetMap provides > attribution (which based on a strict, not taking an chances, reading of the > CC BY 4.0 license, OSM's attribution may not be enough to satisfy CC BY > 4.0). This is detailed at > https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/. > > The waiver is the last page of > https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3PN5zfbzThqeTdWR1l3SzJVcTg/view. DERM > (or whatever their abbreviation is these days) said they won't agree to the > waiver once, and then again a second time in Dec 2018. > > All the other green departments from > https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_data_catalogue were able > to agree. > _______________________________________________ > Talk-au mailing list > Talk-au@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au > -- Jono
_______________________________________________ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
