----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Collinson" <[email protected]>
To: "Licensing and other legal discussions."
<[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 1:56 PM
Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] UK mapping authority switches to Open
Government Licence (was: CTs and the 1 April deadline)
At 08:36 PM 6/01/2011, John Smith wrote:
On 7 January 2011 05:25, Mike Collinson <[email protected]> wrote:
Nope. Clause 4 survives any license changes in the future, it is nothing
to
do with the end user license:
4. At Your or the copyright owner's holder's option, OSMF agrees to
attribute You or the copyright owner holder. A mechanism will be
provided,
currently a web page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attribution.
This would only be useful if there is a chain to follow it back to
OSM, this is specific to OS/Nearmap type situations, they don't
require explicit attributions with map tiles, but they do require
attribution can be found, and while OSM offers to attribute on their
website, downstream may not be subject to the same requirements which
is where clause 3 breaks or contradicts clause 4.
Thanks, now I understand. You are entirely correct that there is no
perpetual guarantee of a chain to follow back to OSM (and thence to a
third
party). Clause 4 only provides what I call level 1 attribution as
described
below. It can survive and is practical and courteous to implement even if
the distribution license, (i.e. a successor to ODbL), eventually went
completely PD, which is why there is no contradiction or breakage by
clause
3.
In the case of the UK OS, there is a switch from a potential requirement
for
level 4 attribution to a clear requirement for level 1, so the Open
Government Licence is definitely good news for handling highly granular
data.
Mike
with regards to the OS OpenData, the bit in the licence which I am unsure
about are the following lines, taken from
http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/opendata/docs/os-opendata-licence.pdf
"You must always use the following attribution statement to acknowledge the
source of the Information : 'Contains Ordnance Survey data Crown Copyright
and database right 2011'"
"The same attribution statements must be contained in any sublicenses of the
information that you grant, together with a requirement that any further
sub-licences do the same"
Unfortunately the line above seems to me to extend the attribution
requirements required for OpenData to a much higher attribution requirement
than that required by the OGL .
Regards
David
In the case of Nearmap, it is my understanding, Ben might like to comment
or
contradict, that level 1 is livable with. The real concern being the
possible that future OSM generations might want to drop share-alike.
In the case of CC-BY, there is some opinion that level 4 is a clear
requirement. Since the Australian government, virtually alone, publishes
data under this license, I have therefore written to the Australian
Attorney
General's Office requesting explicit permission to use attribution level 1
and 2 with level 3 on a best effort basis.
Mike
Third-Party Attribution Levels
Level 1:
OSM(F) acknowledges third party sources on its website or however
technology/social trends change in the future. There is no attempt to get
end users of OSM data to do the same. This is what CT clause 4 does, and
only this.
Level 2:
When any OSM data is "published", i.e. copied from an OSM(F) website via a
planet dump or API, XAPI call, there is something physically present in
the
material transferred that acknowledges third parties. It is LWG policy to
implement this. That something might be a complete list of third party
sources used any where by OSM plus their preferred attribution language.
Or
it might be a link back to the level 1 attribution statement. At the
current level of network bandwidth, the first is impractical for API calls
for single nodes. The LWG is therefore adopting the link mechanism
initially
and this work is almost complete. When working and provenly practical,
the
LWG will be happy to make a minor CT update adding it to clause 4. Note
also that encouraging tagging with a "source" tag is also useful in this
regard, however it is only a best effort as not all contributors will and
source tags may get change or get deleted over time.
Level 3:
End-users re-distributing a copy of the OSM database or a derivative
database are required to maintain any third-party attribution information
intact. Messy in the case of very small extracts and in source tags, but
not
impossible. However, I would not like to force future generations of
OSMers
to require this in perpetuity, (in reality about 135 years given the
current
age of many contributors). Consistent source tagging, and appending to
source tags rather changing them, helps this on a best-effort but not
guarenteed basis.
Level 4:
End-users have to acknowledge third-parties in maps they make. I am
vehemently opposed to this for any form of highly granular data. Even if
individual contributors are excluded, requiring a list of several hundred
sources is not practical and will become worse when OSM data itself is
just
one of several sources used to make a map. Regretfully, imported CC-BY's
"at
least as prominent" for each source exacerbates this situation.
For a longer but outdated discussion see "5. A look at third party
Attribution", LWG minutes 12th Oct 2010:
<http://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_87d3bmhxgc>http://docs.google.com/View?id=dd9g3qjp_87d3bmhxgc
_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
