Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Travel Channel + OSM
If they want "we won't sue you" reassurance the proper place to ask is legal-questi...@osmfoundation.org (which is simply a more manageable conduit to the LWG than le...@osmfoundation.org). http://osmfoundation.org/wiki/License#How_should_I_attribute_you.3F covers video, as outlined there they don't have to show attribution on screen the whole time, doing something when a/the map is first shown would likely be enough. Simon Am 24.02.2015 um 23:59 schrieb alyssa wright: > Hi all, > > Someone from the Travel Channel contacted me about using OpenStreetMap > tiles in an upcoming show but wanted to see if they could attribute OSM > in the ending credits rather than on the map. I was wondering if there > were any thoughts on this? > > Thanks, > Alyssa. > > From the original email: > > Right now I’m working on a new series for the Travel Channel and we’d > like to use your maps as a basis for some GFX that would be used from > time to time in our show. Basic things that pop up now and again to help > the view at home understand where in the world we are and, when > applicable, where we’re traveling to. > > In the past I’ve had no trouble following your very generous credit > guidelines but because of the nature of TV I’m hoping I can make a > slight compromise on how we credit your data. Instead of putting a on > the bottom right corner, which we have to keep open for our Travel > Channel bug and some other graphics, I’d like to give you a credit at > the end of our show. These go for about the last 30 seconds during the > last scene of each episode and will clearly state that all map data for > the series was provided by your organization. > > > ___ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Travel Channel + OSM
2015-02-25 9:51 GMT+01:00 Simon Poole : > If they want "we won't sue you" reassurance the proper place to ask is > legal-questi...@osmfoundation.org > out of curiosity, how many people have been sued in the past 11 years of OpenStreetMap? ;-) cheers, Martin ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Travel Channel + OSM
On 25.02.2015 09:51, Simon Poole wrote: > http://osmfoundation.org/wiki/License#How_should_I_attribute_you.3F > covers video, as outlined there they don't have to show attribution on > screen the whole time, doing something when a/the map is first > shown would likely be enough. Who is behind these unnecessarily restrictive rules about attribution popping up everywhere? It used to be that we simply had that general rule that we wanted attribution reasonable to the medium, which would definitely allow placing attribution into the credits for a video. In my opinion, demanding anything more than a mention in the credits is excessive, considering how many other people and organizations only ever appear there. Of course it would be nice to get more, and we should ask for it. But it should not be a hard rule. Tobias ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Travel Channel + OSM
Am 25.02.2015 um 10:30 schrieb Tobias Knerr: > On 25.02.2015 09:51, Simon Poole wrote: >> http://osmfoundation.org/wiki/License#How_should_I_attribute_you.3F >> covers video, as outlined there they don't have to show attribution on >> screen the whole time, doing something when a/the map is first >> shown would likely be enough. > > Who is behind these unnecessarily restrictive rules about attribution > popping up everywhere? It used to be that we simply had that general > rule that we wanted attribution reasonable to the medium, which would > definitely allow placing attribution into the credits for a video. The text in question goes back to March 2010, I somehow suspect that doesn't really fit the picture of "popping up". However even if it didn't reach back to ancient times I would still point out that guidance and expectations with respect to the licence is going to change over time. Matter of fact if you had asked me in March 2010 I would have likely said that being mentioned in the credits is good enough. Not so today. > > In my opinion, demanding anything more than a mention in the credits > is excessive, considering how many other people and organizations only > ever appear there. Of course it would be nice to get more, and we > should ask for it. But it should not be a hard rule. > In the case in question, based on very little information, it seems as if maps are an integral part of the production/story not just decoration/accessories (were me might want to be less strict). None of the three other players would waiver "on map/screen" attribution just like that, two might be willing to for sizeable amounts of money, the third likely not. We are not asking for anything extraordinary, just for what is customary in the industry. One thing is completely clear: a map without attribution is a google map (even more so where the Travel Channels primary audience is located). Simon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] Confusion about Pins, Trivial Matching, and Collective Databases
I could use more clarification, I keep reading what seem to be conflicting or nuanced positions. What We Want to Do I want to generate a map for a company intranet site showing a client where his vehicles are currently based on lat/long coordinates (given to us by our proprietary mobile app which they run) and existing customer locations (to which those trucks are driving today) (based on the business addresses the customers have previously given to us). We'd set up an OSM tile server for this and use a library for layering/interaction. We don't need to make available our database of truck locations/client addresses. Legal Confusion My reading of the OSM terms lead me to believe that the matching between independent data and OSM data is trivial and thus it is a Collective Database and thus I base this on OSM Legal FAQ which says in 3d, "However, if the two datasets are matched 'trivially' by, for example, automated matching using a simple criterion such as name/locality, this is not 'substantial' and remains a Collective Database." ( http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#3c._If_I_make_something_with_OSM_data.2C_do_I_now_have_to_apply_your_license_to_my_whole_work.3F ) I also base this on the license ( http://osmfoundation.org/wiki/License#Are_there_any_special_conditions_or_restrictions_for_commercial_or_academic_use.3F) which says, "You can however, put separate and distinct data layers on top of your map, such as icons showing specialists points of interest, routes, track logs, shaded areas, contours and the like, then Share-Alike does not apply to these elements as long as they do not interact with the map underneath." But I see what seem to be conflicting responses to such questions, such as on: https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/1073/commercial-use-in-an-application-licenceable?page=1&focusedAnswerId=41359#41359 Any clarity would be most appreciated. I posted on the forum but was told I should ask the question here instead. Thanks. Ben ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Confusion about Pins, Trivial Matching, and Collective Databases
Am 25.02.2015 um 19:21 schrieb Ben: > I could use more clarification, I keep reading what seem to be > conflicting or nuanced positions. You are confusing layman answers, potentially coloured by personal preferences (licence discussion often tend to border on the religious), with legal advice. > > What We Want to Do > > I want to generate a map for a company intranet site showing a client > where his vehicles are currently based on lat/long coordinates (given > to us by our proprietary mobile app which they run) and existing > customer locations (to which those trucks are driving today) (based on > the business addresses the customers have previously given to us). > We'd set up an OSM tile server for this and use a library for > layering/interaction. We don't need to make available our database of > truck locations/client addresses. > > Legal Confusion > > My reading of the OSM terms lead me to believe that the matching > between independent data and OSM data is trivial and thus it is a > Collective Database and thus > > I base this on OSM Legal FAQ which says in 3d, "However, if the two > datasets are matched 'trivially' by, for example, automated matching > using a simple criterion such as name/locality, this is not > 'substantial' and remains a Collective Database." > (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#3c._If_I_make_something_with_OSM_data.2C_do_I_now_have_to_apply_your_license_to_my_whole_work.3F) > Content on wiki.openstreetmap.org is not controlled by the licensor, the OSMF, and as such while it might be helpful it might just as good not be. The same goes for help.openstreetmap.org In your question you note that you are developing this for company internal use only. If this is the case, the whole issue is moot. See the definition “Publicly” – means to Persons other than You or under Your control by either more than 50% ownership or by the power to direct their activities (such as contracting with an independent consultant) and paragraph 4.2 of the ODbL 1.0. Simon “Publicly” – means to Persons other than You or under Your control by either more than 50% ownership or by the power to direct their activities (such as contracting with an independent consultant). - See more at: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/#sthash.YRXWKIBY.dpuf “Publicly” – means to Persons other than You or under Your control by either more than 50% ownership or by the power to direct their activities (such as contracting with an independent consultant). - See more at: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/#sthash.YRXWKIBY.dpuf “Publicly” – means to Persons other than You or under Your control by either more than 50% ownership or by the power to direct their activities (such as contracting with an independent consultant). - See more at: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/#sthash.YRXWKIBY.dpuf signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
