Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Use Case
Hi. I'm Juan Pizarro from Chile, and I'm working on a web aplication used osm data. The idea is to locate Events(concerts, parties, etc) in a specific place, for example a osm place node, our users can comments the events and the places, give some scores... We will have a diferent license for the Events, events comments, scores information than the OSM projects uses. If I understand, based on the previous messages in this thread. if we have a table with the relation osm_id_node, event_id. and other table event_id, name, description, ... or osm_id_node, comment_id and other comment_id,text we only have to release the tables relation osm_id_node, event_id and osm_id_node, comment_id under the CC-BY-SA license or ODbL , because are derived from OSM and the other tables can licensed under wich one we will because aren't derived from OSM. Thanks ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Use Case
Hi Frederik, Thank you for your previous answers. I sill have a couple of remarks and questions. 1. You don't have to release what you haven't got. So if the only thing required for your application to work is the *location* then just store the location and not the address. You can still dump the address to a log file on input, in case you need to follow things up manually later, but if the only thing in your database is the location then that's all you have to release. I think that having to publish locations (latitudes longitudes) is equivalent to having to publish addresses since a location can be converted into an address and vice versa. Therefore, having to publish locations instead of addresses does not protect the privacy. 2. I'm not sure if individual geocoding results really trigger any sort of license reaction as they are so trivial. Maybe the application could be structured in a way that would never even create/contain a substantial extract of OSM. I would rather have a solution not relying on the interpretation of the word substantial as defined in the ODbL license. But briefly, how would you structure the application ? 3. Assume your customers have uploaded 10.000 addresses and 10.000 pictures. You could have one database with the columns picture_id and address, containing what the users have uploaded, and another database with the columns address, lat, lon which contains the geocoding results for these 10.000 addresses. Now if you only mix these databases for display (i.e. you do a SELECT from the geocoding table to find all addresses in the vicinity, and JOIN that with the other table to find the photo IDs), then it is my opinion that you'd only have to release the geocoding db and not the photo db, as the photo table is not derived from OSM in any way. The geocoding table would allow users to see which places you have photos for (but you could add another 100.000 records to that table if you don't want people to know for sure). Maybe you wouldn't even store the address in plain text, but just a MD5 hash? Does the ODbL license allow to add dummy data (for example the 100.000 dummy locations) into a derivative database in order to mask the useful data (for example the 10.000 useful locations) of the derivative database ? Thank you very much for your help. Xavier ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Use Case
Hi Xavier, On 22 November 2010 22:03, Xavier Loiseau xavier.lois...@ijoinery.com wrote: 1. You don't have to release what you haven't got. So if the only thing required for your application to work is the *location* then just store the location and not the address. You can still dump the address to a log file on input, in case you need to follow things up manually later, but if the only thing in your database is the location then that's all you have to release. I think that having to publish locations (latitudes longitudes) is equivalent to having to publish addresses since a location can be converted into an address and vice versa. Therefore, having to publish locations instead of addresses does not protect the privacy. Sorry, I had understood previously that the pictures would be published and you wanted to keep the addresses private. If this is not the case then I don't see much problem, you don't have to publish any new data to anyone, you can make the location available to just the user who submitted the picture -- there's no need to publish this information to any other users because each user's account could equally well live in a separate database. Although I may be misunderstanding the issue again. Cheers ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Use Case
Hi, Is the ODbL license compatible with privacy ? Here is my current understanding: - If the CC-BY-SA license is used, then there is not any privacy issue, since private addresses do not have to be published, - If the ODbL license is used instead, then there is a privacy issue, since private addresses have to be published. Is my understanding correct ? Or is there any solution complying with the ODbL license, without publishing private addresses ? Thank you very much for your help. Xavier ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Use Case
On 11/21/2010 10:00 PM, Xavier Loiseau wrote: Hi, Is the ODbL license compatible with privacy ? Here is my current understanding: - If the CC-BY-SA license is used, then there is not any privacy issue, since private addresses do not have to be published, - If the ODbL license is used instead, then there is a privacy issue, since private addresses have to be published. Is my understanding correct ? Heya. What do you mean by private addreses? Which clause(s) of the ODbL would require you to publish them? Thanks. - Rob. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Use Case
Hi Andrzej, Thank you for your previous answer ! Case A Let us suppose (as you mentioned) that the addresses are published. I think that some users of the web site might consider that there is a privacy issue. At least, I think that there is a privacy issue when a user provides his own address. Case B Let us suppose now (as you mentioned) that a piece of code is published instead of the addresses. I understand from the 4.6 section (quoted below) of the ODbL that the addresses can be retrieved anyway. Therefore, in any case (A or B), I think that there is a privacy issue. 4.6 Access to Derivative Databases. If You Publicly Use a Derivative Database or a Produced Work from a Derivative Database, You must also offer to recipients of the Derivative Database or Produced Work a copy in a machine readable form of: a. The entire Derivative Database; or b. A file containing all of the alterations made to the Database or the method of making the alterations to the Database (such as an algorithm), including any additional Contents, that make up all the differences between the Database and the Derivative Database. Summary Here is my current understanding: - If the CC-BY-SA license is used, then there is not any privacy issue since the addresses do not have to be published, - If the ODbL license is used instead, then there is a privacy issue since the addresses have to be published. Is my understanding correct ? Or is there any solution to protect the privacy while complying with the ODbL license ? Thank you very much for your help. Xavier ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Use Case
Hi Frederik, Thank you very much for you previous answer ! (When you write picture ID, I presume that you mean an identifier of any kind used internally in the web server to identify a picture.) (When you write location, I presume that you mean the latitude longitude (not the address) where the picture has been taken.) Let us suppose (as you mentioned) that the web server contains an OSM derived database associating each picture identifier with the latitude longitude where the picture has been taken. Moreover, let us suppose that a user wants to keep private an address (and the latitude longitude of the address) he provides: - The user can still upload a picture through the web site to the web server, providing the address where the picture has been taken, - But the user can also indicate through the web site that the address (and the latitude longitude of the address) must not be published. As a consequence, such users might not want the OSM derived database (described above) to be published. Is there any solution to protect the privacy of such users while complying with the ODbL license ? Thank you very much for your help. Xavier ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] License Use Case
Hi, Xavier Loiseau wrote: Do the pictures distributed through the web site have to be licensed under the CC-BY-SA license ? Later, will the pictures distributed through the web site have to be licensed under the ODbL license ? I think the answer is no in both cases. However, you might have to share the database that contains your picture IDs keyed against locations in the ODbL case since it could be argued that that database is derived from OSM and publicly used in your service. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
[OSM-legal-talk] License Use Case
Hi, Suppose that a web site can find and show touristic pictures which have been taken in a selected area: - Users can upload pictures to the web server, indicating the address where each picture has been taken, - Users can ask the web site to find and show the pictures which have been taken in the neighborhood of a provided address. The web server internally uses OpenStreetMap data to find the pictures which have been taken in the neighborhood of a provided address. Notice that the web site never displays any map but displays the found pictures and the address where each picture has been taken. Do the pictures distributed through the web site have to be licensed under the CC-BY-SA license ? Later, will the pictures distributed through the web site have to be licensed under the ODbL license ? Thank you very much for your help. Xavier ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
