On 19 November 2014 19:13, Colin Smale <[email protected]> wrote: > UK mapping agency Ordnance Survey stands accused of using £800m of > government contracts to stifle competition in a row over the release of > geographical information as open data. > > http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240234712/Ordnance-Survey-accused-of-stifling-competition-in-open-data-row
Which reminds me, The Office of Public Sector Information / National Archives are currently reviewing Ordnance Survey's Open Data licensing, and are soliciting comments from current and potential re-users. See http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/keeping-touch/re-users-licensees-rss-feed/ OS currently use their custom "OS OpenData Licence" for their own data and also force Local Authorities to do the same when they release OS-derived geodata of their own. This is based on the standard Open Government Licence, but contains some additional terms. Since it's at best unclear whether OS OpenData Licence is compatible with the ODbL, LWG has ruled that we shouldn't use OS OpenData Licensed material in OSM without explicit permission from the rights holders. Further details can be found at http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/os-open-data.html and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Licensing/Ordnance_Survey_OpenData_License . If anyone else is unhappy about OS not just using the standard Open Government Licence (which guarantees compatibility with the ODbL, and hence usability in OSM) this consultation / review would be a good opportunity to let the Office of Public Sector Information know -- as they may actually be able to do something about it. Robert. -- Robert Whittaker _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
