[talk-au] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap
My understanding is that Nearmap wish all contributions to OSM, by any mapper who has agreed to the CT, derived from their imagery (before the 17th June 2011) to be able to be relicenced by OSMF under any licence it (OSMF) chooses at any time. However I also can't see exactly how the published statement meets this wish. Nick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap
On Thu, 16 Jun 2011 09:12:24 +0800 James Andrewartha tr...@student.uwa.edu.au wrote: Sadly, that's not how I understand it - particularly the terms in place between OSM and the individual ... at the relevant time. bit says to me that retrospective signing of the CTs to cover old contributions isn't allowed. James Andrewartha the last time I read the CTs (which have several versions), there was a clear reference to me having the rights to the data and perpetually licensing those rights to another organisation That would stop me signing up whether I used Yahoo! or Bing or NearMap. Indeed it would put a query on a lot of stuff I obtained by sending out GPS devices with random others to collect tracks. Ben, thanks for the offer, but worded as it is I still don't find that compatible with OSMF's terms and conditions. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 7:02 PM, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: the last time I read the CTs (which have several versions), there was a clear reference to me having the rights to the data and perpetually licensing those rights to another organisation That would stop me signing up whether I used Yahoo! or Bing or NearMap. It seems to be the view by a lot of OSMers that tracing Yahoo or Bing is making a new work and that new work is not a derived work in the copyright sense, but rather just a terms of service/contract issue. Hence whomever does the tracing is free to license the work as they please so long as in doing so they are in line with the terms of service of that provider. Both the statements I've seen which OSMers base tracing from these two, seem to make no mention of the copyright of the imagery, and the copyright of derived works. Nearmap took a different approach and made it a license thing rather than a terms and conditions thing. On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 4:48 PM, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote: 2011/6/15 Ben Last ben.l...@nearmap.com All such additions or edits submitted to OSM prior to 17 June 2011 may be held and continue to be used by OSM under the terms in place between OSM and the individual which submitted the addition or edit at the relevant time. I absolutely do not want to be a fly in the ointment here, but what this paragraph literally means is that OSM can do with those edits just those things which it was permitted to do by the individual contributor (and therefore under the terms to which that contributor agreed) prior to 17 June 2011. If that individual's agreement was restricted to a CC-BY-SA licence then OSM is unlikely to be able to then use the nearmap contributions under ODbL. Maybe that is what is understood in this thread, or maybe the context somehow says that this paragraph doesn't mean what it appears to mean, but I thought it was worth saying. Yes. I think I follow-up to this point from nearmap is needed. I agree, reading it this way nearmap is saying that if you clicked yes to the CTs you can distribute your nearmap derived data under any license you want so long as its in line with the CTs, but if you didn't click the CTs you can only distribute as CC-BY-SA, this doesn't sound like what they intended... That it was drafted, carefully, by a lawyer I do not doubt. But lawyers draft things on instruction to achieve particular goals. My understanding from Ben's comment is that one of the goals of nearmap is that derived works are distributed only under CC-BY-SA. The second paragraph does that job well as far as I can see and prevents OSM from relicensing nearmap data under ODbL. All this is, of course, on the assumption that any intellectual property rights require licensing. Unless there is clear case law in this jurisdiction don't see how we can assume otherwise, we must play on the safe side and assume there is. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] [OSM-legal-talk] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap
So those guys put out a legal statement and an employee even gave you his interpretation on this list, which you can cite in court if you want. I think you're pretty solid and it feels like people are just looking for problems no matter what is done or said. :-( Steve stevecoast.com On Jun 16, 2011, at 0:44, Nick Hocking nick.hock...@gmail.com wrote: My understanding is that Nearmap wish all contributions to OSM, by any mapper who has agreed to the CT, derived from their imagery (before the 17th June 2011) to be able to be relicenced by OSMF under any licence it (OSMF) chooses at any time. However I also can't see exactly how the published statement meets this wish. Nick ___ legal-talk mailing list legal-t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rationalising administrative boundaries
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:15 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: The current boundaries will be removed in the near future, so if I were you I wouldn't spend to much time fussing over them. Oh? Do tell? Steve ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rationalising administrative boundaries
On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 11:14 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote: On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:15 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: The current boundaries will be removed in the near future, so if I were you I wouldn't spend to much time fussing over them. Oh? Do tell? All ABS boundaries (infact all .au government provided data that has been imported.. toilets, bbqs, hospitals/police stations) will be removed because theyre all distributed under CC licence, which is not compatible with the licence OSMF are trying to introduce at the moment. That is the reason why very little effort has been expended mapping Australia lately, until we know what skeleton of data we'll have left to work with after the changeover. If you want to map for OSM at the moment, your best bet is to map offline using something like JOSM, then save all your edits to be uploaded when the licence issue has been sorted out, otherwise you might find youre spending hours fixing up the map only to find all your work removed or broken when other users data is removed. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Fwd: [OSM-talk] Bing aerial imagery priorities
-- Forwarded message -- From: Steve Coast st...@asklater.com Date: 17 June 2011 07:09 Subject: [OSM-talk] Bing aerial imagery priorities To: t...@openstreetmap.org Hi I'm speaking personally and there are no guarantees here but I'd like to get input on what areas you would like Bing to prioritise for aerial and/or satellite imagery in the coming year. Please mail sco...@microsoft.com with the area in question (I'd love to accept bounding boxes but don't really have the time so cities/countries are the best). I will pass this on to the right people and we may or may not be able to help. Thanks Steve ___ talk mailing list t...@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap
Yes Steve - you're right. The For Clarity paragraph basically says that contributions from a mapper who hadn't accepted the CT and were derived from Nearmap prior to June 17th 2011 can stay in the data base and do not have to be deleted. They give no time limit or OSM-licence limitations on this allowence to keep the current derived data, therefore I believe that all mappers (who wish their contributions to remain in the OSM project) can now accept the CT without having to worry whether one or more of their contributions was derived from Nearmap. ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] [OSM-legal-talk] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap
On 16 June 2011 14:48, Francis Davey fjm...@gmail.com wrote: That it was drafted, carefully, by a lawyer I do not doubt. But lawyers draft things on instruction to achieve particular goals. My understanding from Ben's comment is that one of the goals of nearmap is that derived works are distributed only under CC-BY-SA. The second paragraph does that job well as far as I can see and prevents OSM from relicensing nearmap data under ODbL. The goal of that statement was to allow any contributions that have been derived from our PhotoMaps under our current licence (which is what imposes the CC-BY-SA redistribution condition) can remain in the OSM db. Not being a lawyer, I'm not going to comment on how the statement may or may not achieve that; I'm not qualified to interpret it. All I can do is make it clear that it was drafted to explicitly allow derived data to stay in the database. I've seen the background correspondence about it, and I know the lawyers involved were well aware of the CTs, the OdBL, the future licence terms, etc, when they drafted it. On 16 June 2011 17:02, Elizabeth Dodd ed...@billiau.net wrote: Ben, thanks for the offer, but worded as it is I still don't find that compatible with OSMF's terms and conditions. Well, a bunch of people here put real effort into finding a way to avoid large amounts of NearMap-derived data being deleted by addressing the licence incompatibility, but we are all busy with many tasks that have to be given a higher priority than this, so I doubt very much that there can be any more legal work done on our side to clarify this further. I'm sure that there could be a long and detailed discussion on whether the statement achieves that but I say again: that's exactly what it was intended to achive and it was written by our lawyers to do just that. :) Regards Ben ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap
Ben said, I say again: that's exactly what it was intended to achive and it was written by our lawyers to do just that. :) Thanks Ben, That makes it crystal clear that nearmappers can accept the CT's. Now hopefully a certain OSMer will find it in their hearts to accept the CT and then I can name those new roads in Canberra quicker than you can say Hibberd Crescent. I also hope that the resident spewers of FUD will finally desist, but I expect this hope is in vain. Cheers Nick ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] Statement from nearmap.com regarding submission of derived works from PhotoMaps to OpenStreetMap
On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 14:21 +1000, Nick Hocking wrote: Ben said, I say again: that's exactly what it was intended to achive and it was written by our lawyers to do just that. :) Thanks Ben, That makes it crystal clear that nearmappers can accept the CT's. Well, mappers who exclusively used nearmap anyway. Unfortunately, as Ben has pointed out many times, the problem isnt that NearMaps terms have created a problem, it is the fact that the new OSM terms are incompatible with the licence most commonly used for this information. While its great that NearMap sourced data can be used, this doesnt mean the incompatibility problems of other data sources are no longer relevant. CC-by-SA data continues to be incompatible with the new terms, and that is not the fault of people who have given their data to be used in the OSM project. David ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
Re: [talk-au] rationalising administrative boundaries
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 11:42 AM, David Murn da...@incanberra.com.au wrote: On Fri, 2011-06-17 at 11:14 +1000, Steve Bennett wrote: On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:15 PM, John Smith deltafoxtrot...@gmail.com wrote: The current boundaries will be removed in the near future, so if I were you I wouldn't spend to much time fussing over them. Oh? Do tell? All ABS boundaries (infact all .au government provided data that has been imported.. toilets, bbqs, hospitals/police stations) will be removed because theyre all distributed under CC licence, which is not compatible with the licence OSMF are trying to introduce at the moment. That is the reason why very little effort has been expended mapping Australia lately, until we know what skeleton of data we'll have left to work with after the changeover. I discovered you can click on the country names on odbl.de. http://odbl.de/australia-oceania.html (Warning, very large page as it has every user). We're put in with the kiwis which is interesting because their data import account is also undecided on CT/ODbL. Anyway, ABS data (suburbs/cities/state boundaries etc.) is the largest sole contributor making up 15% of all nodes. 64% of contributors have accepted CT but only 50% of the ways/nodes at last edit (so that's even including users who modified something CC licenced). ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
[talk-au] OSM licence change article
An article on the OSM licence change on O'Reilly Radar blog. http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/openstreetmap-creative-commons-open-database-license.html -- Craig Feuerherdt ___ Talk-au mailing list Talk-au@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au
