Awesome. NYC used to have the same retraction clause, luckily sane forces did away with it there, too.
Bit by bit US city governments are outrunning OSM in openness :) On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 11:23 PM, Skye Book <skye.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > That is incredibly encouraging news, congrats on the win! A few years > back I started a small discussion on Talk-US on whether or not the NYC data > license was usable as it has a very similar, if not identical, clause in > their own license (The conclusion was the same as yours). > > I'm curious if this is perhaps a term that Socrata offers in their > configuration that cities and municipalities opt-in for. In any case, > thanks for sharing this news.. Definitely something I'll add to my mental > list of open data success stories :) > > -Skye > > On Feb 20, 2013, at 10:31 PM, Ian Dees <ian.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi imports, > > Earlier last year I downloaded the Chicago building footprints shapefile > [0] from the Chicago data portal, chopped it into manageable bits and > started importing it into OSM. Halfway through the process of merging and > uploading this data I read the data portal's license [1] closer, > discovering a clause that makes the datasets offered there incompatible > with OSM. The troublesome clause allows the City of Chicago to require > removal of any City data at any point in the future: > > "The City may require a user of this data to terminate any and all > display, distribution or other use of any or all of the data provided at > this website for any reason including, without limitation, violation of > these Terms of Use or other terms as defined by City agencies or > departments contributing data to this website." > > When I noticed this I immediately stopped uploading data and began a > conversation with the city's data team to discuss ways OSM could move > forward with using the datasets listed on the portal. > > After several months of phone calls, meetings, and waiting, I'm pleased to > announce that the City of Chicago has started to release some of its > datasets under the MIT license on GitHub: [2]. > > As a result of this new license, I will be able to continue importing the > excellent buildings and address data into OSM (more on that later) and > businesses will be able to use this data in their apps and tools without > worrying about an untested license. > > I'm pretty excited about this, as Chicago is seen as a leader in municipal > data and other OSM/Open Data folks can point to this as proof that open > licensing is a very important part of open data. > > -Ian > > [0] https://data.cityofchicago.org/Buildings/Building-Footprints/w2v3-isjw > [1] http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/narr/foia/data_disclaimer.html > [2] https://github.com/chicago/ > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > talk...@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > talk...@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us > >
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list Imports@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
