(This thread was accidentally off-list) On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 9:30 PM, MP<singular...@gmail.com> wrote: >> As it turns out the first clause is (apparently) to facilitate >> tracking of how the data is used and so that they can announce >> updates, and the second is to ensure proper attribution. I've asked >> them permission to quote their complete reply but that's basically it.
> What about derived data? SRTM is used to generate hillshades and > contour lines for example. ASTER data would be good for that too. Do > they have some less strict terms about distributing such derived data > (like requiring only attribution), or is their policy for it the same? The ASTER project is producing a lot more than just global contour lines, they've been taking satellite imagery for example: http://asterweb.jpl.nasa.gov/gallery/images/reykjavik.jpg That particular image is a lot clearer than the equivalent NASA Landsat imagery of Reykjavík which is currently the best free source we can use for tracing. So in any dialog with the ASTER people we should be pursuing a wide array of options applicable for each of their datasets. For satellite imagery it would be a huge win even if we were allowed to just use them for tracing on a closed WMS server (as we're doing in Gaza), even if we ideally would like to be allowed to do more. > What about derived data? SRTM is used to generate hillshades and > contour lines for example. ASTER data would be good for that too. Do > they have some less strict terms about distributing such derived data > (like requiring only attribution), or is their policy for it the same? If they really don't want to allow redistribution of the source dataset they're very unlikely to allow redistribution of generated contours under a free license once they realize what that entails. It would be trivial to automatically generate vector data equivalent to the original dataset from any (lossless) generated contour lines, thus circumventing the original limited use clause. I'm *guess* what the ASTOR people really want is to just ensure data quality with that first clause, and if so we can probably convince them to release it under more liberal terms that would be useful to us (including ones that require attribution). Certainly nobody is confused about the canonical source of the SRTM data being NASA despite it being in the public domain. _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
