Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On 20.09.2012 07:32, Mike Dupont wrote: How can a contributor import any data and keep the data open to license change? How can you keep any imports at all from people who have not agreed to the CT directly? I agree with you in this point. If we import donated data, it must be stated that OpenStreetmap can publish the data under ODbL or any other license as specified in the CT. Could we create a special version of the Contributor Terms for data donations? So they could sign it. We could mail it to the OSMF to keep the records. It is quite common to ask for contributor terms. For big imports a paper contract might be better than a "click here to accept" contract. See what others do, for example apache foundation: http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt Stephan ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On 20/09/12 06:32, Mike Dupont wrote: Hi there, I have a question about imports and the ODBl, I see that some sources have decided to dual license the data http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue But how can some third parties data be compatible when the CT says it can change any time, surly they might be compatible with the current instance of the license, but how can they be compatible with future versions of the license when they are no known? They can be compatible with future licenses, it's just that we don't know one way or the other. How can a contributor import any data and keep the data open to license change? How can you keep any imports at all from people who have not agreed to the CT directly? One way would be by keeping records of such imports, and if the license ever changes again, rechecking the IPR and where necessary removing the data derived from some imports. BTW just because the CTs say that the license *can* be changed, doesn't mean it's likely. Jonathan. -- Dr Jonathan Harley :Managing Director: SpiffyMap Ltd m...@spiffymap.com Phone: 0845 313 8457 www.spiffymap.com The Venture Centre, Sir William Lyons Road, Coventry CV4 7EZ, UK ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On Thursday 20 September 2012 07:32:49 Mike Dupont wrote: > How can you keep any imports at all from people who > have not agreed to the CT directly? There was people, who strongly disagree with actual CT terms, and only way to express that was to not confirm CT and lost ability to participate in the project in the future. But they did not want to damage work of others and send permission to use their data under actual license. By the way, I strongly disagree with way CT has been established too and I do not like that CT does not define mechanism how are controlled changes in CT. But I have confirmed CT after promise, that there would be some discussion. The last e-mail from ODbL+CT advocate I received. > Subject Re: OpenStreetMap is changing the licence > Date 26 February 2011 at 00:21 > > Hello Pavel. > Thank you very much for your detailed answer. > You’re right: 3 weeks is not enough. They’ll change that hopefully. > > Sleep well, > Erik I have never got any ansfer from OSMF after that nor for my other attempts to at least try to find way how people disagreeing with CT could be motivated to donate their future data under ODbL to OSM and get back access to CC-BY-SA compatible subset of OSM data. I (for myself strongly demand) that my former and future change sets can be exported from OSM under CC-BY-SA but I have never got any better reply than "do not fear, there would be no problems (with Wikipedia, exports, etc.) or unfair CT or license change". Best wishes, Pavel ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Stephan Knauss wrote: > Could we create a special version of the Contributor Terms for data > donations? So they could sign it. We could mail it to the OSMF to keep the > records. This was my idea from today, make a clause like the GPL has, v2 or any future version published by the FSF. that would eliminate the CTs and the madness. Make a OSM copyleft license, or just use Creative commons 4.0 and any future version, then we can get back to work. I think it is a great error to introduce the CTs and it is a great error to put faith in the OSMF board who show no responsibility, better to put faith in the creative commons board who at least listen to people and care about porting licenses. mike -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
> From: Pavel Pisa [mailto:ppisa4li...@pikron.com] > Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 3:01 AM > To: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data > > I (for myself strongly demand) that my former and future change sets can > be exported from OSM under CC-BY-SA but I have never got any better > reply than "do not fear, there would be no problems (with Wikipedia, > exports, etc.) or unfair CT or license change". You can build changesets going back to Nov 2009 from the hourly diffs with make_changeset[1]. These would be CC BY-SA 2.0 and unredacted. I intend to make it easier to use make_changeset to build multiple changesets at once, but you could do it now with a simple shell script to call it for each changeset. If you are actually interested in the generation of changesets from diffs, you can follow the project on github. You can get a list of all your changesets from the changeset dump files either with grep, or a more sophisticated method would be ChangesetMD[2] For current changesets you could download them and grant someone additional rights, the problem is that you could only grant rights for your portion of the .osc file and an .osc file contains information from other contributors. [1]: https://github.com/pnorman/make_changeset [2]: https://github.com/ToeBee/ChangesetMD ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Mike Dupont wrote: > I think it is a great error to introduce the CTs and it is a great > error to put faith in the OSMF board who show no responsibility, > better to put faith in the creative commons board who at least listen > to people and care about porting licenses. The Creative Commons (board): - advised OSM not to use CC licenses as they "license creative works, not data." - declined to co-develop ODbL with OSM and lead to creation of OpenDataCommons. OSMF and LWG and the OSM community at large have listened to a great many opinions and ideas and adopted the best of them. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
- Original Message - From: "Mike Dupont" To: "Licensing and other legal discussions." Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2012 2:34 PM Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:03 PM, David Groom wrote: Should the licence change to something other than CC-BY-SA 2.0 or ODbL 1.0, OSMF have guaranteed that they will identify and remove any data incompatible with that licence. Incidentally, I believe that the burden OSMF have imposed upon themselves makes it almost certain that no other licence than CC-BY-SA 2.0 or ODbL 1.0 would ever be used. Ok, well then if this is so, then we dont need to leave the license question open as in the CT. Why all the drama then? I guess whoever drafted the CT's wanted to leave the possibility of other licences as open as possible. If I can resolve this question, then it should not be a problem for me to convince people to add the odbl clause to people providing data. I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "convince people to add the odbl clause to people providing data". David I cannot ask people to agree to an open license, that is out of the question, but odbl for database rights does not seem to be a problem. It occurs me then under certain condions then cc-by-sa data from europe which has database rights anyway might be just fine and a moot point. thanks for your answers and opinions, mike -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:06 PM, David Groom wrote: > I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "convince people to add the odbl > clause to people providing data". I mean I asked people to give us the data under cc-by-sa, and now i would have to go back and ask for the odbl database rights, that might be something I could do, at least I can understand it. that is different than to ask for the CT which is my eyes basically a copyright assignment to the osmf, I cannot understand that or explain it. mike -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Mike Dupont wrote: > that is different than to ask for the CT which is my eyes basically a > copyright assignment to the osmf, I cannot understand that or explain And to add in one more point, I dont want to have to go back again and again to donors asking for more and more rights, we need to nail this down once and for all. -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
Mike Dupont writes: On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Mike Dupont wrote: that is different than to ask for the CT which is my eyes basically a copyright assignment to the osmf, I cannot understand that or explain And to add in one more point, I dont want to have to go back again and again to donors asking for more and more rights, we need to nail this down once and for all. This is a good reason to have contributor terms. It also protects users of the data from the possibility of lawsuits just because someone who agreed to donate data in the past changed mind. My opinion: If someone gives data to OSM then it must be without any special treatment. We agree to mention the contribution in the wiki, but no source tag. Some data was allowed to be imported if we name the source. So we ended up with a lot of source tags in the DB. What happens if someone removes these source tags? We violate the license of a data import. I believe we do not want to have that arguing later. Either someone accepts the OSM Terms and contributes or we don't want the contribution at all. It creates a lot of hassle to have endless special contracts. So better have a clear contributor term also for imports. And no need to contact them again in one year, or in five. Stephan ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Stephan Knauss wrote: > This is a good reason to have contributor terms. the contributor terms introduce more problems, like the fact that it prevents anyone from importing any derived works. lets say i download the new cc-by-sa+odbl database make changes and publish them, then you want to import them back, you cannot because I did not agree to the terms. so the sharealike just fails when you introduce cts with a copyright assignment, in my opinion, or am I missing something? Basically the CTs prevent any other compatible OSM servers to share data with osm, it creates an island of data with no way to share with anyone except via usage. mike -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Mistake in French translation of the CT
On 20/09/2012 16:32, Pieren wrote:
Hi legal-list,
I would like to point out an error in your French translation of the CT:
http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms/FR
compared to its original
(http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms).
Section 3. says "CC-BY-SA 2.0 ; ou toute autre licence libre et
ouverte de même type (comme, par exemple,
http://www.opendefinition.org/okd/) qui pourra être ponctuellement
choisie par une majorité de 2/3 des contributeurs actifs parmi les
membres d’OSMF. "
where the English version says :
"CC-BY-SA 2.0; or such other free and open licence (for example,
http://www.opendefinition.org/okd/) as may from time to time be chosen
by a vote of the OSMF membership and approved by at least a 2/3
majority vote of active contributors. "
The French version says that a 2/3 majority vote of active
contributors "within the OSMF members" is required ("parmi les membres
d’OSMF.") which makes a big difference. Could someone fix it, please ?
regards
Pieren
Thanks for pointing that out Pieren. I'll put it on the LWG TODO list
to make sure it gets done. None of us speak good French though, if
anyone would like to provide an accurate translation, I would be
grateful. We can double check it with our original legal translator but
I don't think that is imperative as the intent is clear.
Mike
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Mistake in French translation of the CT
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Michael Collinson wrote: > None of us speak good French though, if anyone would > like to provide an accurate translation, I would be grateful. I would suggest: "par une majorité de 2/3 des contributeurs actifs." instead of the current: "par une majorité de 2/3 des contributeurs actifs parmi les membres d’OSMF." Pieren ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On 20/09/2012 07:32, Mike Dupont wrote: Hi there, I have a question about imports and the ODBl, I see that some sources have decided to dual license the data http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue But how can some third parties data be compatible when the CT says it can change any time, surly they might be compatible with the current instance of the license, but how can they be compatible with future versions of the license when they are no known? How can a contributor import any data and keep the data open to license change? How can you keep any imports at all from people who have not agreed to the CT directly? thanks mike This one has been covered pretty exhaustively previously. To recap for all interested: () The CTs where written carefully to say, "If you contribute Contents, You are indicating that, as far as You know, You have the right to authorize OSMF to use and distribute those Contents under our current licence terms." "current license terms", so ODbL 1.0. () The future is the future, so cannot be known. () Should the license terms change in the future, there is a possibility that imported data may become incompatible. Therefore the original licensor needs be contacted for approval. Given the general trend to more open data, after what we are all about, that approval may well be given. () Note also that, by design, a duty to provide first level attribution is placed on the OSMF. This survives any potential license change and is general the most important concern of government organisations. () The is always the possibility that data may need to be removed and that is one of the minuses of imports. That is why it is important to always understand third-party licenses and to get general consent of any potentially affected, usually national or regional level, OSM mapping community before importing. There is a healthy debate indirectly about this going on in the general talk list. Mike ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On 20/09/2012 09:13, Stephan Knauss wrote: On 20.09.2012 07:32, Mike Dupont wrote: How can a contributor import any data and keep the data open to license change? How can you keep any imports at all from people who have not agreed to the CT directly? I agree with you in this point. If we import donated data, it must be stated that OpenStreetmap can publish the data under ODbL or any other license as specified in the CT. Could we create a special version of the Contributor Terms for data donations? So they could sign it. We could mail it to the OSMF to keep the records. We certainly envisioned that possibility when we designed the contributor terms, though so far it has not proved necessary. Instead, OSMF can enter into an MOU. We've done that with the South African spatial directorate for example and there are discussions going on in Finland. I believe that in the case of AND Dutch data, we've agreed that we will notify them of any potential license change so thatany ramifications can be discussed. Henk Hoff may be able to give clearer information on that. If you have any particular case, the LWG will be happy to work with you on it. Mike ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Michael Collinson wrote: > () The CTs where written carefully to say, "If you contribute Contents, You > are indicating that, as far as You know, You have the right to authorize > OSMF to use and distribute those Contents under our current licence terms." > "current license terms", so ODbL 1.0. so that means that you can reimport the derived works back under odbl from a osm deriviate during the time that it has the same license? and it also means that if I publish data under the cc-by-sa+odbl that it can be used in osm? if so, that would be at least a good basic working agreement with any other projects. mike -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
Mike Dupont writes: On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 4:41 PM, Stephan Knauss wrote: This is a good reason to have contributor terms. the contributor terms introduce more problems, like the fact that it prevents anyone from importing any derived works. lets say i download the new cc-by-sa+odbl database make changes and publish them, then you want to import them back, you cannot because I did not agree to the terms. That's the price you have to pay for your peace of mind to be sure to have clean data in your database with the current license and any future. Apache Foundation has the same problem. They can only bring back data with a signed contributor paper. so the sharealike just fails when you introduce cts with a copyright assignment, in my opinion, or am I missing something? Sharealike is for people who use OSM data. It prevents from 3rd party taking the data and turn it into proprietary stuff. Basically the CTs prevent any other compatible OSM servers to share data with osm, it creates an island of data with no way to share with anyone except via usage. From OSM to 3rd party is fine, the way back is IMHO not possible with the current contributor terms. Problems would start once we change the license again. So modifying the CTs to exclude the "or any other license" clause might improve the situation. But we could never upgrade the license. Also sounds like a bad idea given the experience gained with the switch to ODbL. We do not want to have a redaction bot 3.0. OSM contributors must grant OSMF all rights to use and redistribute the data, might be called in German "uneingeschränktes Nutzungsrecht" ~ "nonexclusive, unlimited right of use". The current terms use some different words but it sounds exactly like this. I see no point where you are required to give away your copyright. In German law this is not possible at all and OSMF explicitly states "non-exclusive". So you keep all the rights of your data. You can't withdraw your permission in the future if you dislike the OSMF way. This protects the future of the project but it costs you some interoperability. Only original copyright holder can pass the needed rights to OSMF and thus only these can contribute. It sounds like a good way to prevent from white-washing tainted data by passing through a 3rd party. If an import can't give the usage rights I think we should not import this data. Stephan ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 5:34 PM, Michael Collinson wrote: > If you have any particular case, the LWG will be happy to work with you on > it. well my case is to translate the terms into Albanian and go back to people who donated data and try and ask them to sign off on it, there are different cases of data being donated. Also we need to make sure that archive.org is happy to host this data under the new terms, being that it should be free for all people under clear terms. we are still struggling to translated and port cc to albanian, and with all these new licenses and terms it just makes it more and more difficult. thanks, mike -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On Sep 20, 2012, at 1:32 AM, Mike Dupont wrote: > > How can a contributor import any data and keep the data open to > license change? How can you keep any imports at all from people who > have not agreed to the CT directly? > IMO, you can really only be sure if: - it's your data - it's public domain-like data (e. g. at most it requires you to attribute) - if you have the express permission of the data owner to contribute under CT I explicitly think we need to clarify this section in the current CT and avoid having any data imported that cements the current licensing status for all times. > thanks > mike > > -- > James Michael DuPont > Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org > Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com > Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org > Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 > > ___ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk Alex Barth http://twitter.com/lxbarth tel (+1) 202 250 3633 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On Sep 20, 2012, at 3:13 AM, Stephan Knauss wrote: > On 20.09.2012 07:32, Mike Dupont wrote: >> How can a contributor import any data and keep the data open to >> license change? How can you keep any imports at all from people who >> have not agreed to the CT directly? > I agree with you in this point. > > If we import donated data, it must be stated that OpenStreetmap can publish > the data under ODbL or any other license as specified in the CT. > > Could we create a special version of the Contributor Terms for data > donations? So they could sign it. We could mail it to the OSMF to keep the > records. I think that could be useful, especially if hosted on osmfoundation.org and with an attached list of who has signed. When trying to work with potential data owners I usually struggle to point to a clear procedure on how data is being passed on to OSM and I struggle with coming up with good examples of other institutions who have opened data to OSM with an explicit permission. I'd prefer something very short referring to the CT, essentially saying "X hereby grants express permission to contribute X data under the CT to OSM." > > It is quite common to ask for contributor terms. For big imports a paper > contract might be better than a "click here to accept" contract. > > See what others do, for example apache foundation: > http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt > > Stephan > > > ___ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk Alex Barth http://twitter.com/lxbarth tel (+1) 202 250 3633 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [GIS-Kosova] OSM road network for Kosova
Bekim, I have been working on understanding the new license even today. it is cc-by-sa + database rights (odbl) + the right for osm to change the licence at will in the future. basically you need to grant the osm the rights to use the data, Michael can give you more info about this, thanks, mike On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Bekim Kajtazi wrote: > Gent's, > > Some days ago I noticed that all those detailed roads that were on OSM in > Kosova were removed. > Does anyone have any information, like when? why? were removed. > > I am about to contact OSM and any assistance and additional information is > welcome! > > Best, > Bekim > > > -- > about.me/bekim > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "GIS Kosova" group. > To post to this group, send email to gis-kos...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > gis-kosova+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/gis-kosova?hl=en. -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [GIS-Kosova] OSM road network for Kosova
I dont understand that myself, it seems a bit fuzzy to me but this is the right mailing list and I hope you will get some feedback, thanks mike On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:07 PM, Bekim Kajtazi wrote: > Ok but I don't know how to go about and do that! That's my problem. > Where is the starting point? > > I am ready to approve, sign, confirm anything required! > > Best, > Bekim > > > > On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Mike Dupont > wrote: >> >> Bekim, >> I have been working on understanding the new license even today. >> it is cc-by-sa + database rights (odbl) + the right for osm to change >> the licence at will in the future. >> >> basically you need to grant the osm the rights to use the data, >> Michael can give you more info about this, >> >> thanks, >> >> mike >> >> On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 8:59 PM, Bekim Kajtazi >> wrote: >> > Gent's, >> > >> > Some days ago I noticed that all those detailed roads that were on OSM >> > in >> > Kosova were removed. >> > Does anyone have any information, like when? why? were removed. >> > >> > I am about to contact OSM and any assistance and additional information >> > is >> > welcome! >> > >> > Best, >> > Bekim >> > >> > >> > -- >> > about.me/bekim >> > >> > -- >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> > Groups >> > "GIS Kosova" group. >> > To post to this group, send email to gis-kos...@googlegroups.com. >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> > gis-kosova+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> > For more options, visit this group at >> > http://groups.google.com/group/gis-kosova?hl=en. >> >> >> >> -- >> James Michael DuPont >> Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org >> Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion >> http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com >> Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org >> Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 > > > > > -- > about.me/bekim > -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
Mike, I think we should come to a clearer recommendation, specifically with regards to share-alike data. The highly infectuous character of share alike licenses severely restricts OSM's leeway of adjusting its license and we shouldn't paint ourselves into a corner this way. Here are the simple rules I do recommend currently when talking to people and that I would love OSM to adopt officially. Contribute only data that is: - Yours - Is public domain or merely requires attribution - You have an explicit permission from owner for contribution to OSM for BTW, I actually think there are only very few potential datasets that are in question here. I have doubts whether ODbL is actually compatible given OSMF's option to change the license to another open license in the future, and CC-BY-SA is clearly not compatible as it does not distinguish between derived and produced works. On Sep 20, 2012, at 11:26 AM, Michael Collinson wrote: > On 20/09/2012 07:32, Mike Dupont wrote: >> Hi there, >> >> I have a question about imports and the ODBl, >> >> I see that some sources have decided to dual license the data >> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue >> >> But how can some third parties data be compatible when the CT says it >> can change any time, surly they might be compatible with the current >> instance of the license, but how can they be compatible with future >> versions of the license when they are no known? >> >> How can a contributor import any data and keep the data open to >> license change? How can you keep any imports at all from people who >> have not agreed to the CT directly? >> >> thanks >> mike >> > This one has been covered pretty exhaustively previously. To recap for all > interested: > > () The CTs where written carefully to say, "If you contribute Contents, You > are indicating that, as far as You know, You have the right to authorize OSMF > to use and distribute those Contents under our current licence terms." > "current license terms", so ODbL 1.0. > > () The future is the future, so cannot be known. > > () Should the license terms change in the future, there is a possibility that > imported data may become incompatible. Therefore the original licensor needs > be contacted for approval. Given the general trend to more open data, after > what we are all about, that approval may well be given. > > () Note also that, by design, a duty to provide first level attribution is > placed on the OSMF. This survives any potential license change and is general > the most important concern of government organisations. > > () The is always the possibility that data may need to be removed and that is > one of the minuses of imports. That is why it is important to always > understand third-party licenses and to get general consent of any potentially > affected, usually national or regional level, OSM mapping community before > importing. There is a healthy debate indirectly about this going on in the > general talk list. > > Mike > > ___ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk Alex Barth http://twitter.com/lxbarth tel (+1) 202 250 3633 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
that sounds more like my conclusion, it is the end of the road for share alike and sharing for osm. basically it is turning into a dead end road. well guys please help bekim, i have sent him to you, mike On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 9:18 PM, Alex Barth wrote: > > Mike, I think we should come to a clearer recommendation, specifically with > regards to share-alike data. > > The highly infectuous character of share alike licenses severely restricts > OSM's leeway of adjusting its license and we shouldn't paint ourselves into a > corner this way. > > Here are the simple rules I do recommend currently when talking to people and > that I would love OSM to adopt officially. > > Contribute only data that is: > > - Yours > - Is public domain or merely requires attribution > - You have an explicit permission from owner for contribution to OSM for > > BTW, I actually think there are only very few potential datasets that are in > question here. I have doubts whether ODbL is actually compatible given OSMF's > option to change the license to another open license in the future, and > CC-BY-SA is clearly not compatible as it does not distinguish between derived > and produced works. > > On Sep 20, 2012, at 11:26 AM, Michael Collinson wrote: > >> On 20/09/2012 07:32, Mike Dupont wrote: >>> Hi there, >>> >>> I have a question about imports and the ODBl, >>> >>> I see that some sources have decided to dual license the data >>> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Catalogue >>> >>> But how can some third parties data be compatible when the CT says it >>> can change any time, surly they might be compatible with the current >>> instance of the license, but how can they be compatible with future >>> versions of the license when they are no known? >>> >>> How can a contributor import any data and keep the data open to >>> license change? How can you keep any imports at all from people who >>> have not agreed to the CT directly? >>> >>> thanks >>> mike >>> >> This one has been covered pretty exhaustively previously. To recap for all >> interested: >> >> () The CTs where written carefully to say, "If you contribute Contents, You >> are indicating that, as far as You know, You have the right to authorize >> OSMF to use and distribute those Contents under our current licence terms." >> "current license terms", so ODbL 1.0. >> >> () The future is the future, so cannot be known. >> >> () Should the license terms change in the future, there is a possibility >> that imported data may become incompatible. Therefore the original licensor >> needs be contacted for approval. Given the general trend to more open data, >> after what we are all about, that approval may well be given. >> >> () Note also that, by design, a duty to provide first level attribution is >> placed on the OSMF. This survives any potential license change and is >> general the most important concern of government organisations. >> >> () The is always the possibility that data may need to be removed and that >> is one of the minuses of imports. That is why it is important to always >> understand third-party licenses and to get general consent of any >> potentially affected, usually national or regional level, OSM mapping >> community before importing. There is a healthy debate indirectly about this >> going on in the general talk list. >> >> Mike >> >> ___ >> legal-talk mailing list >> legal-talk@openstreetmap.org >> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > > Alex Barth > http://twitter.com/lxbarth > tel (+1) 202 250 3633 > > > > > > ___ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://flossk.org Saving wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com Contributor FOSM, the CC-BY-SA map of the world http://fosm.org Mozilla Rep https://reps.mozilla.org/u/h4ck3rm1k3 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] importing ODBl data
On 09/20/2012 08:46 PM, Mike Dupont wrote: that sounds more like my conclusion, it is the end of the road for share alike and sharing for osm. > basically it is turning into a dead end road. What in the hoof are you talking about? - Rob. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
