Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
Sorry I didn't see this thread until today, and I have some thoughts on it. On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote: There are now at least 1 to 2 reports every month of folks not giving us proper CC-BY-SA attribution. These are mostly websites but include poster advertising, a TV advertisement and a TV show. We need a reliable process for dealing with these. I'm glad the OSMF is taking this situation seriously. Currently, the License Working Group has been doing some work but it feels that it is not dealing with the issues adequately and some issues not at all. What should we do? I've suggested this in the past, but I think we need a multi-pronged approach. First, I think the OSMF has a role to play in some of these activities, like the Python Foundation is going, creating a pamplet to hand out. It could explain what OSM is, and how to use its work. Second, I think the right approach is to try to handle infractions against the license in the most efficient way possible, and I think that's really working with the third party map providers to ensure they're educated on the matter and that they have a system in place to handle customers who don't take compliance seriously. To do this I think the OSMF could make a program/seal of approval and work with the various map providers on this issue, including ensuring they have a process for handling compliance, and encourage the community to use these organizations who have shown a commitment to the project. Third, I think we need to remember that the moment a violation occurs, that it's not a license violation anymore, but rather a simple copyright violation, and that each and every one of us who contributes is a copyright holder in this collective work. The CT will help in the future, but there's nothing stopping any one of us from standing up for our copyrighted work. The mechanism for that changes per country. In the US, even though I've been fighting against it for a long time (http://bit.ly/dMpPGJ), the DMCA provides a straightforward mechanism for handling copyright violations, which include license violations. - Serge ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
Am 21.03.2011 01:12, schrieb Frederik Ramm: Certainly not under CC-BY-SA where OSMF has no legal basis for suing anyone Thats another reason why I prefer a community based approach here. Beside I think our aim shouldn't be to sue anybody but to fix the missing license naming. Matthias ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
On 21 March 2011 05:54, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: What were the suggestions at the meeting(s)? The minutes suggest that I reported an issue some time ago and they kept it as an item to be dealt at future meetings for about 6 months and then they sort of let it fall off at some point without actually being dealt with. So I can only conclude the LWG has no clue how to deal with these issues. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
2011/3/21 Frederik Ramm frede...@remote.org: Russ Nelson wrote: Gert, as long as OSM is copyrighted, the OSMF will need to be in the business of suing OSMers. Certainly not under CC-BY-SA where OSMF has no legal basis for suing anyone (because even if OSM is copyrighted, OSMF is not the copyright holder nor has OSMF been formally asked to sue on their behalf by the copyright owners). - It *might* be different under ODbL but even if OSMF had a legal basis to sue somebody, we already have ODbL / CT for everybody who agreed to the license change or signed up newly in the last months. For all this data OSMF already is copyright holder. cheers, Martin ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
Might be the legal talklist a better place to discuss this very specific topic? I guess there are more users that are familar with the process itself. Matthias ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
Hi, M?rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: we already have ODbL / CT for everybody who agreed to the license change or signed up newly in the last months. For all this data OSMF already is copyright holder. No. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
2011/3/21 Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de: Might be the legal talklist a better place to discuss this very specific topic? I guess there are more users that are familar with the process itself. So this conversation goes quietly into the night like most other threads rather than being dealt with? ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
Am 21.03.2011 14:53, schrieb John Smith: 2011/3/21 Matthias Meißerdig...@arcor.de: Might be the legal talklist a better place to discuss this very specific topic? I guess there are more users that are familar with the process itself. So this conversation goes quietly into the night like most other threads rather than being dealt with? Was just an idea, cause I noticed that here aren't that much people interested in this topic, so I assumed at legal mailinglist are more people that are familar with the OSMF processes. And I didn't saw a reason to 'annoy' this official list with this very specific topic. Matthias ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
!i! wrote: Was just an idea, cause I noticed that here aren't that much people interested in this topic, so I assumed at legal mailinglist are more people that are familar with the OSMF processes. And I didn't saw a reason to 'annoy' this official list with this very specific topic. Actually, I believe that the topic is very well placed here. The licence change is a matter that has been discussed widely, controversially and extensively. The funny thing about this is: If nobody is willing to enforce a licence when it is being violated, if nobody cares whether it is respected or ignored - then there is no need for a licence, a licence change or discussion about it at all, it's all void and the OSM data is effectively involuntary public domain. Therefore I'd say: Either be consistent and and look for a way to politely but firmly enforce the licence - or be consistent and drop the licence altogether. bye Nop -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/A-reliable-process-for-handling-OSM-license-violations-tp6190047p6192875.html Sent from the General Discussion mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
Gert, as long as OSM is copyrighted, the OSMF will need to be in the business of suing OSMers. If you don't like the idea that the OSMF should come after a fellow mapper, why, then, welcome to the group of us who believe that OSM should be in the public domain. -russ TBH I really don't care that much about how OSM is licenced, as long as it's not a proprietary licence, but I believe that if people aren't attributing correctly, it's most likely an oversight than anything else. A polite and importantly, private, email is appropriate. Naming and shaming in instances of simple oversight sounds dangerously close to authoritarianism and I very strongly believe OSM should not even consider going anywhere near there, *unless* someone steals OSM data and then claims it's their own. Nick ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
On Mon, 21 Mar 2011 14:01:43 +0100 Matthias Meißer dig...@arcor.de wrote: Might be the legal talklist a better place to discuss this very specific topic? I guess there are more users that are familar with the process itself. Matthias The LWG minutes indicate that Mike is to ask the community for comment. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 14:01 +0100, Matthias Meißer wrote: Might be the legal talklist a better place to discuss this very specific topic? I guess there are more users that are familar with the process itself. This isnt a legalese issue. Well, as much as someone stealing your car is a legalese issue. You dont need a lawyer to tell you that someone stealing your car is not a good thing. The 'very specific topic' is the theft of our (or OSMF's, depending on who you listen to) data. David ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
[OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
There are now at least 1 to 2 reports every month of folks not giving us proper CC-BY-SA attribution. These are mostly websites but include poster advertising, a TV advertisement and a TV show. We need a reliable process for dealing with these. Currently, the License Working Group has been doing some work but it feels that it is not dealing with the issues adequately and some issues not at all. What should we do? Here's a run down of what happens at the moment: - At the very minimum, there should be a public record of alleged violations to show that these things do not pass un-noticed and to provide a central point for collating frequency and the nature of the problem. So far, if the LWG hears a report, we document the basics in a Hall of Shame section of our weekly meeting minutes, http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes - A member of the OSMF board or LWG takes up the particular issue. This depends very much on personal enthusiasm. It requires initial tact - most instances are neglect/cannot be bothered rather than purely wilful. It requires persistance and follow-up, - we generally get an oh we will fix it immediately ... and then they don't. It requires careful coordination within the OSM/OSMF community to provide a united front. It may require research - for example, how exactly should a TV ad provide a CC-BY-SA attribution? And lastly, future cases may involve bumping up to formal legal help and legal action. Not easy for one person to do. Mike OSM Foundation License Working Group ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
Michael Collinson mike at ayeltd.biz writes: There are now at least 1 to 2 reports every month of folks not giving us proper CC-BY-SA attribution. These are mostly websites but include poster advertising, a TV advertisement and a TV show. We need a reliable process for dealing with these. It might help if the person who chases the licence violation is one of the copyright holders in the map displayed. So if the case concerns a map of Helsinki, pass it on to the Helsinki mappers - one of whom will see his or her own work - and they will be able to say directly, you are infringing my copyright. A local mapper is also better placed to contact organizations in their native language and to be familiar with local laws. The LWG can co-ordinate the process - and contact directly when there is no local angle involved, as with a map of the whole world - but I think there is some value in decentralizing the licence checking, as is done for the mapping itself. -- Ed Avis e...@waniasset.com ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
Am 20.03.2011 18:49, schrieb Michael Collinson: there should be a public record of alleged violations There is already http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution IMHO even if a offical License working group making things easier , we have to take care that this process is community based. regards Matthias ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
Stop this nonsense. OSM is about mapping, not about enforcement of licenses. Take your GPS and go outside. Or do some useful mapping or japan of libya. Stop hustling the community about this kind of trivialities. We are NOT commercial, and there is no money involved !! Nothing to lose but our time! Hall of Shame : Gert Gremmen -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Michael Collinson [mailto:m...@ayeltd.biz] Verzonden: zondag 20 maart 2011 18:49 Aan: OSM talk Onderwerp: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations There are now at least 1 to 2 reports every month of folks not giving us proper CC-BY-SA attribution. These are mostly websites but include poster advertising, a TV advertisement and a TV show. We need a reliable process for dealing with these. Currently, the License Working Group has been doing some work but it feels that it is not dealing with the issues adequately and some issues not at all. What should we do? Here's a run down of what happens at the moment: - At the very minimum, there should be a public record of alleged violations to show that these things do not pass un-noticed and to provide a central point for collating frequency and the nature of the problem. So far, if the LWG hears a report, we document the basics in a Hall of Shame section of our weekly meeting minutes, http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes - A member of the OSMF board or LWG takes up the particular issue. This depends very much on personal enthusiasm. It requires initial tact - most instances are neglect/cannot be bothered rather than purely wilful. It requires persistance and follow-up, - we generally get an oh we will fix it immediately ... and then they don't. It requires careful coordination within the OSM/OSMF community to provide a united front. It may require research - for example, how exactly should a TV ad provide a CC-BY-SA attribution? And lastly, future cases may involve bumping up to formal legal help and legal action. Not easy for one person to do. Mike OSM Foundation License Working Group ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
hi Gert, well I prefer to do practival things like mapping, too. But with growing database OSM comes more attractive to others. I don't see any bad things on monitoring this usage and drop a line, if they miss the license and OSM hint. Even if this might look small-minded, this just makes sure, that the real endusers can get back in contact to OSM and see that they can use it for anything they want. Please remember, nobody forces you to do so Gert, but to me it's ok if Michael would like to create a better organized process. Matthias ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
On Sun, 20 Mar 2011 18:49:25 +0100 Michael Collinson m...@ayeltd.biz wrote: We need a reliable process for dealing with these. Currently, the License Working Group has been doing some work but it feels that it is not dealing with the issues adequately and some issues not at all. What should we do? Honestly I would have expected some suggestions from the LWG, rather than just the list of what happens now. What were the suggestions at the meeting(s)? The minutes suggest that this has been on the table for some time, so surely there are some suggestions already. I would have no difficulty in advising someone that they had used material without attribution, and have definitely already done so with two open source projects. However, do not think that I will do so under a different licence where I am not the actual copyright holder. If OSMF wishes to hold the copyright, OSMF can deal with the problems. ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
Gert, as long as OSM is copyrighted, the OSMF will need to be in the business of suing OSMers. If you don't like the idea that the OSMF should come after a fellow mapper, why, then, welcome to the group of us who believe that OSM should be in the public domain. -russ ce-test, qualified testing bv - Gert Gremmen writes: Stop this nonsense. OSM is about mapping, not about enforcement of licenses. Take your GPS and go outside. Or do some useful mapping or japan of libya. Stop hustling the community about this kind of trivialities. We are NOT commercial, and there is no money involved !! Nothing to lose but our time! Hall of Shame : Gert Gremmen -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: Michael Collinson [mailto:m...@ayeltd.biz] Verzonden: zondag 20 maart 2011 18:49 Aan: OSM talk Onderwerp: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations There are now at least 1 to 2 reports every month of folks not giving us proper CC-BY-SA attribution. These are mostly websites but include poster advertising, a TV advertisement and a TV show. We need a reliable process for dealing with these. Currently, the License Working Group has been doing some work but it feels that it is not dealing with the issues adequately and some issues not at all. What should we do? Here's a run down of what happens at the moment: - At the very minimum, there should be a public record of alleged violations to show that these things do not pass un-noticed and to provide a central point for collating frequency and the nature of the problem. So far, if the LWG hears a report, we document the basics in a Hall of Shame section of our weekly meeting minutes, http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes - A member of the OSMF board or LWG takes up the particular issue. This depends very much on personal enthusiasm. It requires initial tact - most instances are neglect/cannot be bothered rather than purely wilful. It requires persistance and follow-up, - we generally get an oh we will fix it immediately ... and then they don't. It requires careful coordination within the OSM/OSMF community to provide a united front. It may require research - for example, how exactly should a TV ad provide a CC-BY-SA attribution? And lastly, future cases may involve bumping up to formal legal help and legal action. Not easy for one person to do. Mike OSM Foundation License Working Group ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Re: [OSM-talk] A reliable process for handling OSM license violations
Russ, Russ Nelson wrote: Gert, as long as OSM is copyrighted, the OSMF will need to be in the business of suing OSMers. Certainly not under CC-BY-SA where OSMF has no legal basis for suing anyone (because even if OSM is copyrighted, OSMF is not the copyright holder nor has OSMF been formally asked to sue on their behalf by the copyright owners). - It *might* be different under ODbL but even if OSMF had a legal basis to sue somebody, it could very well decide that the possibility of a lawsuit is deterrence enough and simply ignore the few that are undeterred. Bye Frederik -- Frederik Ramm ## eMail frede...@remote.org ## N49°00'09 E008°23'33 ___ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
