Re: [OSM-legal-talk] question regarding produced work
Lars, can I ask what you're trying to achieve here? Do you believe the data or processes have value? Are you uncertain how to replicate the transformation steps yourself? If so, I suspect there are a number of people in the community who'd be glad to help figure this out. Given the trivial nature of the transformation (as I understand it from this thread), it seems possible you are more interested in enforcement than the outcomes it produces. I'll submit that this is unlikely to cast OSM in a positive light among its potential users. The license is a tool, not an end in itself. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] question regarding produced work
Hi,
On 11/19/2015 04:04 PM, Lars-Daniel Weber wrote:
> The guidelines say that you need even to release the steps to create
> a derived database (or share the diff or share the database itself).
Yes, but the Trivial Transformations guideline[1] explains:
"We therefore define a term "trivial transformation", ... which covers
alterations of OpenStreetMap data which are not considered interesting
or useful enough to warrant the conditions of a derivative database."
If the database used by the web site in question was a derivative
database, then your above statement (release data or steps) would be
true; but if it is the result of a trivial transformation, then it is
not even a derivative database - it is the *same* database that you find
in the planet file.
You have to understand that "database" here is not meant to be "the bits
and bytes I have in my PostGIS instance" but the more abstract
"collection of data from OSM that describes the physical world". If you
transform that from EPSG:4326 to EPSG:3857 then it is still the same
database, and not a different database.
The Trivial Transformations page has a discussion item about rendering
databases that says: "A rendering database should be considered a
trivial transformation provided that it is purely created from an
algorithmic recasting of the original data with the intent to make
rendering [...] easier and faster, since no information has been added."
This also reflects my opinion, and hence I believe the maker of the
OePNV-Karte cannot be forced to reveal anything. Although I should think
that he would, if asked politely.
> So it's not done by saying: "download the raw data".
> That's against the license.
Your opinion, not that of the Trivial Transformations guideline, because
if the preprocessing is a trivial transformation, then the "raw data" is
the *same* database as the preprocessed rendering database, and no
"derived database" exists which would have to be shared.
>> You said that you have made several requests to the site operator to
>> hand over the data. Has *any* of them been a polite request where you
>> did not express your assumed entitlement to receive it ("Dear XXX could
>> I perhaps have a copy of the data"), or have they been like ("Hello XXX
>> your data is ODbL hence you must give it to me") from the start?
>
> I've read some discussions about this on IRC. My request was about a
> small "how to get the result" as described before.
Was your request a polite "could you share this" request or did you
choose a "you have to share this so give it to me" wording?
Bye
Frederik
[1]
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Open_Data_License/Trivial_Transformations_-_Guideline
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] question regarding produced work
Frederik Ramm wrote on Donnerstag, 19. November 2015 um 13:46 Uhr:
>
> I would have a stronger opinion if it were a case where external data is
> mixed with OSM to create an "added value" product - but if someone just
> mangles the OSM data a bit, I'm tempted to view that as part of the
> rendering.
The guidelines say that you need even to release the steps to create
a derived database (or share the diff or share the database itself).
So it's not done by saying: "download the raw data".
That's against the license.
> You said that you have made several requests to the site operator to
> hand over the data. Has *any* of them been a polite request where you
> did not express your assumed entitlement to receive it ("Dear XXX could
> I perhaps have a copy of the data"), or have they been like ("Hello XXX
> your data is ODbL hence you must give it to me") from the start?
I've read some discussions about this on IRC. My request was about a
small "how to get the result" as described before.
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] question regarding produced work
Hi,
On 11/19/2015 08:51 AM, Lars-Daniel Weber wrote:
> Three days are gone and still no discussion about this topic.
I think that as long as no external sources are used, and there's just a
clever preprocessing that runs a couple of spatial analyses on the OSM
data, generating other OSM data from OSM data, I'd say it passes as a
trivial transformation and it is totally OK for the operator of the site
to say: "It's OSM data, you can download it from OSM".
I would have a stronger opinion if it were a case where external data is
mixed with OSM to create an "added value" product - but if someone just
mangles the OSM data a bit, I'm tempted to view that as part of the
rendering.
I think you are right in expecting an answer from the site operator
(instead of just not receiving any answer) but I think that answer
should be "my data is from planet.openstreetmap.org, you can download it
from there."
You said that you have made several requests to the site operator to
hand over the data. Has *any* of them been a polite request where you
did not express your assumed entitlement to receive it ("Dear XXX could
I perhaps have a copy of the data"), or have they been like ("Hello XXX
your data is ODbL hence you must give it to me") from the start?
I trust this satisfies your desire for a discussion about this topic.
Bye
Frederik
--
Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09" E008°23'33"
___
legal-talk mailing list
legal-talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] question regarding produced work
? there are 4 responses to your mail, at least one with a question that you haven't answered . Am 19.11.2015 um 08:51 schrieb Lars-Daniel Weber: > Three days are gone and still no discussion about this topic. > I think, nobody is really interested in discovering license violations and > penalize the violators. > > Why do we have ODbL at all, if all we do is to discuss about the license > itself or tell guys to write the correct attributation? > > ODbL is more than an attribuation on a website! > > ___ > 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] question regarding produced work
Three days are gone and still no discussion about this topic. I think, nobody is really interested in discovering license violations and penalize the violators. Why do we have ODbL at all, if all we do is to discuss about the license itself or tell guys to write the correct attributation? ODbL is more than an attribuation on a website! ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] question regarding produced work
Reading http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/%C3%96pnvkarte and the talk page, I would assume that what you are interested in is the rendering styles. The data seems to be from OSM. I am not sure that you would have a legal standing to request them. Only if he used AGPL licensed styles would you be able to request a copy of derived works. mike On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 4:30 AM, Simone Cortesi wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Lars-Daniel Weber > wrote: >> Simon Poole wrote on Montag, 16. November 2015 um 12:40 Uhr: >>> Lars, is there any indication that the site uses for the map anything >>> else than existing OSM data? >> >> It's heavily post-processed OpenStreetMap data, f.e. buffers, results of >> spatial analysis etc. >> There is no external data involved. >> >>> Note that we do not require trivial transformations of OSM data to be >>> published as long as the original data is available (for very obvious >>> reasons). See >>> http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines/Trivial_Transformations_-_Guideline >> >> It's not trivial in terms of "normal" spatial algorithms, which can be found >> in GEOS, Postgres etc. > > are you referring to the "halo" you see around train stations? like > here: http://i.imgur.com/yO4SpuI.png > > it could just be algorithmic. > > -- > -S > > ___ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk@openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk -- James Michael DuPont Kansas Linux Fest http://kansaslinuxfest.us Free/Libre Open Source and Open Knowledge Association of Kansas http://openkansas.us Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova http://www.flossk.org Saving Wikipedia(tm) articles from deletion http://SpeedyDeletion.wikia.com ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] question regarding produced work
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Lars-Daniel Weber wrote: > Simon Poole wrote on Montag, 16. November 2015 um 12:40 Uhr: >> Lars, is there any indication that the site uses for the map anything >> else than existing OSM data? > > It's heavily post-processed OpenStreetMap data, f.e. buffers, results of > spatial analysis etc. > There is no external data involved. > >> Note that we do not require trivial transformations of OSM data to be >> published as long as the original data is available (for very obvious >> reasons). See >> http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines/Trivial_Transformations_-_Guideline > > It's not trivial in terms of "normal" spatial algorithms, which can be found > in GEOS, Postgres etc. are you referring to the "halo" you see around train stations? like here: http://i.imgur.com/yO4SpuI.png it could just be algorithmic. -- -S ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] question regarding produced work
Dear Simon! Simon Poole wrote on Montag, 16. November 2015 um 12:40 Uhr: > Lars, is there any indication that the site uses for the map anything > else than existing OSM data? It's heavily post-processed OpenStreetMap data, f.e. buffers, results of spatial analysis etc. There is no external data involved. > Note that we do not require trivial transformations of OSM data to be > published as long as the original data is available (for very obvious > reasons). See > http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines/Trivial_Transformations_-_Guideline It's not trivial in terms of "normal" spatial algorithms, which can be found in GEOS, Postgres etc. Sincere regards, Lars-Daniel Weber ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] question regarding produced work
Lars, is there any indication that the site uses for the map anything else than existing OSM data? Note that we do not require trivial transformations of OSM data to be published as long as the original data is available (for very obvious reasons). See http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Community_Guidelines/Trivial_Transformations_-_Guideline Simon Am 16.11.2015 um 12:25 schrieb Lars-Daniel Weber: > Dear Ladies and Gentlemen! > > The website "http://öpnvkarte.de/"; is based on OpenStreetMap data, licensed > under ODbL. It shows produced work (rendered tile images, style licensed > under CC-BY-SA 2.0) as defined in section 1.0 of ODbL. > > Since there is a Publicly Use of a Derivative Database, the author should > release a machine readable form of data, as described in section 4.6. Upon > request, the author didn't answer several requests by several people. > > What's next correct step to do? Shall I contact the provider of the OSM > database and inform him about the user? I think, there are some steps > described in section 9. > > Sincere regards, > Lars-Daniel Weber > > ___ > 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
[OSM-legal-talk] question regarding produced work
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen! The website "http://öpnvkarte.de/"; is based on OpenStreetMap data, licensed under ODbL. It shows produced work (rendered tile images, style licensed under CC-BY-SA 2.0) as defined in section 1.0 of ODbL. Since there is a Publicly Use of a Derivative Database, the author should release a machine readable form of data, as described in section 4.6. Upon request, the author didn't answer several requests by several people. What's next correct step to do? Shall I contact the provider of the OSM database and inform him about the user? I think, there are some steps described in section 9. Sincere regards, Lars-Daniel Weber ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
