I guess the whole point of Overture is to blend in not-quite-open-enough data with a QA-verified OSM to make a more populated map. The licence will always be incompatible for importing data into OSM. Whether this prevents you from guiding mapping to areas where buildings in Overture came predominantly non-OSM, but still "Open", sources (e.g. Microsoft AI building outlines) is another thing. And as you say, you cannot [actually i'd have to check whether the individual record tells you the provenance] tell exactly where it came from, only that it isn't from raw OSM.
On Mon, Feb 3, 2025 at 9:39 AM Warin <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On 3/2/25 20:10, Chris Andrew wrote: > > Hi, all. > > > > You'll have seen an article in "WeeklyOSM 758", from the Heidelberg > > Institute for Geoinformation Technology (HeiGIT): > > > > https://heigit.org/osm-completeness-with-overture-maps-data/ > > > > The article explained how relatively simply, OSM 'completeness' can be > > assessed using 'open and accessible' maps from the Overture Maps > > Foundation. I'm wondering how this information can be used to improve > > the quality of OSM coverage, in a prioritised (not automated) workflow. > > > > For example, could reports be run for an area(/s) and the results used > > to create new tasks (MapRoulette)? > > > > What does anyone think? > > > > Arr just found this in their FAQ > > "Generally, Overture data is licensed under the Community Database > License Agreement – Permissive v2 (CDLA) unless derived from a source > that requires publishing under a different license, such as data derived > from OpenStreetMap, that constitutes a “Derivative Database” (as defined > under ODbL v1.0), which will be licensed under ODbL v1.0. > > Overture considers (A) any maps or outcomes obtained by computational > analysis that are created using Overture data licensed under CDLA > Permissive v 2.0, or (B) the supplementing of (1) a Data Recipient’s > content or (2) a third-party’s data – in either case, obtained through > computational analysis – with CDLA Permissive v.2-licensed data from > Overture, to be “Results” and according to Section 3, not subject to the > requirement to provide the text of the license." > > So how do we tell what data is what license? > And I don't think OSM can use CDLA as it is probably not compatible > with ODbL > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-GB mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb >
_______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
