Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Proposal for a revision of JA:Available Data
> what’s the difference in reading a printed sign on the street and a shops website stating the opening hours for our purpose? For me, "a printed sign on the street" is on-the-ground information, and "a shops website" is not on-the-ground information. muramoto ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Copy information from official business website (WAS: Proposal for a revision of JA:Available Data)
> that to cover the entire website was thinking of how it would specifically > apply to the hours of shops, as opposed to Maybe slightly OT: would you be inclined to argue the opening hours of your own shops to be an original collection of facts under the common law? ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Copy information from official business website (WAS: Proposal for a revision of JA:Available Data)
Re the "misleading" license - I do not think that anyone at Tesco who wrote that to cover the entire website was thinking of how it would specifically apply to the hours of shops, as opposed to, for example, a phishing site that attempted to emulate the Tesco site. The different with the Sacramento open data portal is that clearly they intended to apply CC-BY to the data. Now, that said, I doubt that the Sacramento data administrators knew that CC-BY and ODbL are not fully compatible. This is a case where one might write in and obtain a waiver. On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 12:04 AM tomoya muramoto wrote: > I understand that dominant opinion is the fact data published on the > official website is available to OSM. > It's good for the OSM community to be clear about available data. > > I would like to ask again about similar cases that I do not understand > enough. > > Assume that TESCO has published the shop data under the CC BY license. > Then can I use that data for OSM? > I think that data is not available because CC BY license is incompatible > with ODbL as OSMF has stated. > https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/ > > However, current data published by TESCO under the "misleading" terms is > considered as available. > > It seems unreasonable for me that open data is not available and > "misleading" terms data is available. > > And another case. > Many municipalities have published open data under CC BY license. For > example, Sacramento County has published the location data of the drainage > pumps under CC BY license. > > https://data-sacramentocounty.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/37cc6535316e43dbab8e1942ef1d7313_3 > Can I use this data for OSM without additional permission? > I think that it is not available because it is incompatible with ODbL. > However, drainage pumps are managed by Sacramento County, and their names > and locations are fact data, so they can be considered as available. Which > is correct? > > After this discussion I would like to make an OSM wiki page as an > agreement by the OSM global community. > wiki/Available_Data is fine for it? > > Thanks. > > muramoto > ___ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk > ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] Copy information from official business website (WAS: Proposal for a revision of JA:Available Data)
I understand that dominant opinion is the fact data published on the official website is available to OSM. It's good for the OSM community to be clear about available data. I would like to ask again about similar cases that I do not understand enough. Assume that TESCO has published the shop data under the CC BY license. Then can I use that data for OSM? I think that data is not available because CC BY license is incompatible with ODbL as OSMF has stated. https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/ However, current data published by TESCO under the "misleading" terms is considered as available. It seems unreasonable for me that open data is not available and "misleading" terms data is available. And another case. Many municipalities have published open data under CC BY license. For example, Sacramento County has published the location data of the drainage pumps under CC BY license. https://data-sacramentocounty.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/37cc6535316e43dbab8e1942ef1d7313_3 Can I use this data for OSM without additional permission? I think that it is not available because it is incompatible with ODbL. However, drainage pumps are managed by Sacramento County, and their names and locations are fact data, so they can be considered as available. Which is correct? After this discussion I would like to make an OSM wiki page as an agreement by the OSM global community. wiki/Available_Data is fine for it? Thanks. muramoto ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
