Tim - For GDPR, there's not a lot of clarity yet because the regulation is only going into effect next week. I suspect in practice, the answer with be that the processing is legal because it is to fulfill the contractual terms (of the creative commons license requiring attribution, which is a contract with the data subject that basically anyone can accept), and then if removal is later requested, then you can remove the image in question (or just the attribution, if that's what the person prefers) from your site/app (this is polite anyway). The person will have to ask each place for removal, since each place is using the image is issuing it for their own purposes. (Generally, with an open dataset, you're not going to have a list of everyone who got the dataset so you can't send them an update.) I'm not sure if a photograph catching someone in the background would be a problem or not, since they are inadvertently captured and there's no other info about them, but I suppose it would be polite to remove or blur the photo if someone objected. -Kathleen
On Wed, May 16, 2018, 1:16 AM Tim Frey <tim.f...@iunera.com> wrote: > Thank you Kathleen and Tobias, > > This is some very valuable insight. > > > > From our terms of use, we could likely open the content, but you are right > – it is about what users think. Hence, we will and can ask them. Thanks a > lot for rising this point. > > One rising concern, when I read your text, Kathleen, is the GDPR – what > happens if a user wants content deleted and it is already copied all over > the web by an open license. Or even worse, a user uploads a picture of a > scenery and there are human faces in the scenery .. and this picture is > distributed. I see potential problems here for us and the organizations > using the pictures. Additional thoughts please? > > > > I like the Wikipedia and in special the Wikivoyage direction also. Does > somebody know the best touchpoints to get in contact with the community > there? > > > > In general, I agree to what you said that manual work for content > filtering and legal issues would be needed – what is also one point for us > to discuss with the community first: We can provide the software and open > source the stuff, but to create valuable content for the specific use > cases, we’ll need the community and partners who share common goals to get > this successfully going. So all ideas in this direction are welcome, too. > > Best > > Tim > > > > *Von:* Kathleen Lu <kathleen...@mapbox.com> > *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 16. Mai 2018 00:25 > *An:* Tobias Knerr <o...@tobias-knerr.de> > *Cc:* Tim Frey <tim.f...@iunera.com>; talk@openstreetmap.org > > > *Betreff:* Re: [OSM-talk] Open sourcing of POI pictures for OSM > App/STAPPZ - Feedback and ideas wanted > > > > Hi Tim, > > Your app and what you hope to do with it both sound interesting. I hope > you are successful. > > Here's some more information on the open licensing front to consider: > > - In order to have the legal rights necessary to "open" the material your > users contributed, you would likely needed to have gotten a perpetual > irrevocable royalty-free license with an unlimited right to sublicense (not > limited to only your affiliates, etc), or an assignment, though the latter > is far more than needed. > > - But would use of the photos/text outside of the STAPPZ app be > consistent with your users' expectations for their photos/text? If no, then > even if you can legally do it you may be passing an unwelcome burden to an > open community. > > - What open license would you provide the photos/text under? CC-BY is a > common one for photos, though it is not inherently compatible with ODbL > (the license for OSM). There is however a waiver template that makes CC-BY > it compatible with ODbL: > https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/ > > There is the separate issue with CC-BY that users are supposed to > attribute the author. Do your users expect/want their names to be > attributed to the photos if they are used outside the App? This may raise > data privacy issues a well (especially with GDPR coming into enforcement). > > - As for open source of the code, you'll have a choice between a > permissive license (e.g. MIT, BSD, ISC, DWTFYW) or a copyleft license (e.g. > GPL, LGPL) or something in between (MPL, Apache). Permissive licenses make > it easier for someone else to take over the project, though there is the > possibility that they will take it in a direction you do not like (e.g., > build a new version but not open the code to the new version). Copyleft > licenses are intended to guard against this, but most companies do not like > working with copyleft code and many ban it, so there would be a smaller > pool of potential interest. > > You can see OSMF's current open source projects here: > https://github.com/openstreetmap. The licenses currently used are ISC, > BSD, DWTFYW, Apache 2.0, and GPL. > > Best of luck! > > -Kathleen > > > > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 2:45 PM Tobias Knerr <o...@tobias-knerr.de> wrote: > > Hi Tim, > > On 11.05.2018 17:19, Tim Frey wrote: > > Out of this, we consider, heavily, to “open source” the licensing of the > > user created STAPPZ content for the OSM community. In addition, we also > > consider to open source the backend of STAPPZ and the IOS and Android > > app to make a community project out of it. > > I'm going to split this reply into two parts: About the content, and > about the software itself. > > > As for the content, a lot depends on if you can publish the images under > the terms of an open license.¹ That's a legal question, but probably > also a bit of a social one (i.e. would this be in line with what the > creators expected when they shared their images on your app, or would > they be unpleasantly surprised/unhappy about this). > > Assuming the answer is that yes, you can publish them, the next question > is what to do with the images. OSM does not currently have an image > hosting platform, so if we're only talking about contributing the > images, they would need to be donated to a separate platform. > > The obvious recipient for such an image donation would be Wikimedia > Commons, as they're the most popular repository for open-licensed media. > Images on Commons can be linked with OpenStreetMap POIs² and are used as > such by some OSM-based maps. Of course, they're also used by Wikipedia > and its sister projects – notably Wikitravel, which is a crowdsourced > travel guide (although much closer to the traditional book format than > your project). > > A caveat is that such a donation would likely require some manual effort > to filter out lower-quality pictures or duplicates, and to add > meaningful descriptions. Still, assuming the legalities work out, it > seems feasible to donate the images and would be a generous contribution > to the open content ecosystem. > > > Ok, so let's talk about the app and backend a bit. I'm not sure how > familiar you are with OSM's organizational model, but as a rule we're > very decentralized – even core components of OSM are being developed as > mostly independent Open Source projects. For you, this means that even > if there's community interest, any re-use of your project would probably > still start out with _you_ spearheading its development, re-imagining it > as something you believe fits a need of the OSM community, and trying to > gain mindshare in the OSM contributor and developer community. Of > course, this may be at odds with your goal to focus on other projects. > > If this does not discourage you, though, let's consider what needs the > software could serve. I don't have any amazing ideas to offer, but I > could see two basic roles in the OSM ecosystem an image platform might > potentially be able to fill. Broadly speaking: > * Images could be used internally by OSM contributors as a data source > for mapping in addition to sources as aerial imagery and GPS tracks. > * Images could be displayed by user-facing sites and apps alongside OSM > data. (I believe this is what you were getting at with your Google Maps > comparison.) > > The former use case is already partially covered by > Mapillary/OpenStreetCam, so the question is if there's enough of a niche > left for another app. > > The latter seems more ambitious. As I mentioned before, mappers are > currently using tags like image=* with links to external platforms to > add images to OSM POI. Those links can technically point anywhere, > although Wikimedia Commons currently appears to be the most popular > platform to host the images. Inviting users (including non-mappers) to > easily contribute images to a dedicated, OSM-affiliated platform might > be a worthwhile cause. Not sure how well this fits your platform's > existing social features, though. > > Tobias > > > ¹ Typically one of the open CC licenses: CC0, CC-BY or CC-BY-SA. > ² Using http://wiki.osm.org/Key:image > or http://wiki.osm.org/Key:wikimedia_commons > > _______________________________________________ > talk mailing list > talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk > >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
