Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license: What is publication/distribution?
I had a look at the Use Cases at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Open_Data_License and most of them are very traditional - printing a map/book, TV, DVD and a map on a web page. What about modern use cases, mainly web-based mashups?? I added a use case for photo geotagging (ala Flickr), blog geotagging, microblogging and wikipedia. Also, embedding coordinates in urls and as hCard metadata. Have a look at them. Does the new license allow these? How should OSM be attributed? BTW - The Open_Data_License page is referring a lot to some sections (4.4, 4.4c..) - are those sections in the new license, and where can they been seen? BR, Kari On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 7:22 AM, Peter Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:legal-talk- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Ward Sent: 07 October 2008 00:47 To: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license: What is publication/distribution? On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 03:52:54PM +0100, Peter Miller wrote: I have added the brief to the wiki here. Notice that I have also created a 'Use Cases' section heading where we can add key example uses of the data which we can use to validate the final licence. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Open_Data_License I'd just like to say thank you very much for this, and the discussion you have helped provoke so far. Thanks, I am please how well the process is working. I notice some changes to the wiki page, and that there are new words to clarify what is public and some new use cases which is good to see. I have gone through the wording in the brief to try to clarify and condense the new elements. I have also moved the comment about making a million DVDs to the Use Cases section. There is still more work needed on the Brief and on the Use Cases but it is certainly getting there. Peter Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.-John Gall ___ 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] New license: What is publication/distribution?
Thanks for adding the new use cases. To be clear the process is to first catalogue the Use Cases and then to ensure that the new licence works with them as far as possible, not the other way round. It will be interesting to see if the current draft currently covers them, but is not essential. The introduction paragraph of the ODBL wiki page does point to the draft licence text; however this draft is very out of date. A later draft of the licence with some minor changes made by a pro-bono lawyer representing the OSMF does exist but has not been released to the community yet. There may by now be a further draft following a scheduled meeting between Steve Coast and a lawyer a week ago on behalf of the OSMF however I have had no information about the outcome of that meeting. Andy Robinson indicated that information would be available on the OSMF website 'soon' in a post on this list on the 28th Sept. http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/2008-September/001212.ht ml Can I suggest that we continue this useful discussion based on the information already available to us and remind ourselves that this is a process that can occur without the legal text as it is really part of the specification phase? We can be catch-up with the legal text is due course and the OSMF gives us more information! I think we should add a clause to the brief about 'fair use' and then give examples of when we believe this is appropriate, ie when 'non-substantial' parts of the DB are used which may be relevant for some of the use cases. Regards, Peter _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kari Pihkala Sent: 07 October 2008 08:05 To: Licensing and other legal discussions. Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license: What is publication/distribution? I had a look at the Use Cases at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Open_Data_License and most of them are very traditional - printing a map/book, TV, DVD and a map on a web page. What about modern use cases, mainly web-based mashups?? I added a use case for photo geotagging (ala Flickr), blog geotagging, microblogging and wikipedia. Also, embedding coordinates in urls and as hCard metadata. Have a look at them. Does the new license allow these? How should OSM be attributed? BTW - The Open_Data_License page is referring a lot to some sections (4.4, 4.4c..) - are those sections in the new license, and where can they been seen? BR, Kari On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 7:22 AM, Peter Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:legal-talk- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Ward Sent: 07 October 2008 00:47 To: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license: What is publication/distribution? On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 03:52:54PM +0100, Peter Miller wrote: I have added the brief to the wiki here. Notice that I have also created a 'Use Cases' section heading where we can add key example uses of the data which we can use to validate the final licence. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Open_Data_License I'd just like to say thank you very much for this, and the discussion you have helped provoke so far. Thanks, I am please how well the process is working. I notice some changes to the wiki page, and that there are new words to clarify what is public and some new use cases which is good to see. I have gone through the wording in the brief to try to clarify and condense the new elements. I have also moved the comment about making a million DVDs to the Use Cases section. There is still more work needed on the Brief and on the Use Cases but it is certainly getting there. Peter Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.-John Gall ___ 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] New license: What is publication/distribution?
Frederik Ramm wrote: There is one other thing I would hope the new license addresses, which is very unclear at the moment: When does something count as published? 4.2 Notices. You must, if You publicly Use by any means and in any form, this Database, any Derivative Database, or the Database as part of a Collective Database: [...] 4.4. Share Alike. a. Any Derivative Database You publicly Use by any means and in any form, must be only under the terms of: i. This Licence; ii. A later version of this Licence; iii. A compatible licence. 4.5... c. Use of a Derivative Database wholly internally to an organisation is not to the public and therefore does not fall under the requirements of Section 4.4. And from the preamble: 'Use' - As a verb, means doing any act that is restricted by Database Rights or copyright and neighbouring rights whether in the original medium or any other; and includes modifying the Database as may be technically necessary to use it in a different mode or format. So my reading is that, at present, wholly internally to an organisation would not include off-site contractors of the type you describe. cheers Richard ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license: What is publication/distribution?
Richard, regarding your quoting from the license. Firstly: 4.5... c. Use of a Derivative Database wholly internally to an organisation is not to the public and therefore does not fall under the requirements of Section 4.4. I think that wholly internally to an organisation has exactly the kind of ambiguity that I wanted to avoid. If you have your organisation's books checked by an auditing firm, then your books are still wholly internal to your organisation, or at least they are more wholly internal to your organisation than public, right? On the other hand, I don't know what the word public means to a native speaker exactly, but my feeling would be that any type of restricted access is *not* public. E.g. if I make a derived database and give it only to three customers of mine, this is surely not a service I am offering to the public. By speaking of public on one hand and wholly internally on the other, the license seems to omit those cases where (a) the use is still internal but involves work from someone else, like the print shop or the auditing example, and those where (b) the use is not really public but still takes the form of distributing a product to one or more people or organisations. If would expect (a) not to trigger the share-alike element, and (b) to do so. I don't know if it is even possible to write down a sharp distinction between the two cases, but for me there is a world of difference between (a) giving a data base to someone whom I pay to do something with it for me - as if he were my employee, and (b) giving a data base to a customer to use as he pleases. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license: What is publication/distribution?
On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Frederik Ramm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't know if it is even possible to write down a sharp distinction between the two cases, but for me there is a world of difference between (a) giving a data base to someone whom I pay to do something with it for me - as if he were my employee, and (b) giving a data base to a customer to use as he pleases. Precisely this distinction was drawn in the GPL version 3, for precisely the reason you give: http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html 2. Basic Permissions. [...] You may convey covered works to others for the sole purpose of having them make modifications exclusively for you, or provide you with facilities for running those works, provided that you comply with the terms of this License in conveying all material for which you do not control copyright. Those thus making or running the covered works for you must do so exclusively on your behalf, under your direction and control, on terms that prohibit them from making any copies of your copyrighted material outside their relationship with you. - Rob. ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license: What is publication/distribution?
Frederik Ramm wrote: By speaking of public on one hand and wholly internally on the other, the license seems to omit those cases where (a) the use is still internal but involves work from someone else, like the print shop or the auditing example, and those where (b) the use is not really public but still takes the form of distributing a product to one or more people or organisations. Yes, it's a good point. Suggest you formally submit the request to OSMF, maybe quoting Rob's GPL example. cheers Richard ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license: What is publication/distribution?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:legal-talk- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Fairhurst Sent: 06 October 2008 13:39 To: Licensing and other legal discussions. Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license: What is publication/distribution? Frederik Ramm wrote: By speaking of public on one hand and wholly internally on the other, the license seems to omit those cases where (a) the use is still internal but involves work from someone else, like the print shop or the auditing example, and those where (b) the use is not really public but still takes the form of distributing a product to one or more people or organisations. Yes, it's a good point. Suggest you formally submit the request to OSMF, maybe quoting Rob's GPL example. I don't like the phrase 'submit your request', it sounds very hierarchical. Given that the OSMF I still being very silent about what they are doing and not doing around the licence I suggest that we continue to work on these definitions ourselves here and I suggest that we use the wiki page to capture our conclusions. We should assume that the relevant people on the OSMF will take note and contribute as appropriate in due course. I have added the brief to the wiki here. Notice that I have also created a 'Use Cases' section heading where we can add key example uses of the data which we can use to validate the final licence. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Open_Data_License Feel free to tweek it and add comments to the talk page to say why you have done it. I may be a little silent for the rest of the week due to other work pressures. Regards, Peter cheers Richard ___ 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] New license: What is publication/distribution?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:legal-talk- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Fairhurst Sent: 06 October 2008 16:08 To: Licensing and other legal discussions. Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license: What is publication/distribution? Peter Miller wrote: I don't like the phrase 'submit your request', it sounds very hierarchical. Given that the OSMF I still being very silent about what they are doing and not doing around the licence I suggest that we continue to work on these definitions ourselves here and I suggest that we use the wiki page to capture our conclusions. If you wish. I intensely dislike using a wiki for discussions so will stay here. Nor do I personally see why we need this brief - ODL already does what I want a licence to do. Legal-talk is good for talk and yes, it should probably stay here, but the wiki is good for capturing agreed changes so that others can see what was agreed without having to trawl back through every email. After all, the Map Features wiki page is purely a summary of the conversations on talk about individual issues but people wouldn't expect newbies to read all of talk to learn how to tag. I put the current version of the brief on the wiki because I want to avoid being the 'owner' of the current draft of the brief. I know you are happy to read the licence text; however I still think a more approachable document has value, particularly if we find things we want to be change. I can almost read legal text, but I can't write it, that's what lawyers are for. Thanks, Peter cheers Richard ___ 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] New license: What is publication/distribution?
On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 03:52:54PM +0100, Peter Miller wrote: I have added the brief to the wiki here. Notice that I have also created a 'Use Cases' section heading where we can add key example uses of the data which we can use to validate the final licence. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Open_Data_License I’d just like to say thank you very much for this, and the discussion you have helped provoke so far. Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.—John Gall signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license: What is publication/distribution?
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:legal-talk- [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Ward Sent: 07 October 2008 00:47 To: legal-talk@openstreetmap.org Subject: [Spam] Re: [OSM-legal-talk] New license: What is publication/distribution? On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 03:52:54PM +0100, Peter Miller wrote: I have added the brief to the wiki here. Notice that I have also created a 'Use Cases' section heading where we can add key example uses of the data which we can use to validate the final licence. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/Open_Data_License I'd just like to say thank you very much for this, and the discussion you have helped provoke so far. Thanks, I am please how well the process is working. I notice some changes to the wiki page, and that there are new words to clarify what is public and some new use cases which is good to see. I have gone through the wording in the brief to try to clarify and condense the new elements. I have also moved the comment about making a million DVDs to the Use Cases section. There is still more work needed on the Brief and on the Use Cases but it is certainly getting there. Peter Simon -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works.-John Gall ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
