I make extensive use of the data from Surrey and Langley and consider them to be models of the best practice for open data licensing, with all their data licensed under PDDL.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Richard Weait [mailto:rich...@weait.com] > Sent: Sunday, February 12, 2012 1:55 PM > To: Talk-CA OpenStreetMap > Subject: [Talk-ca] Canadian Municipal Open Data Licenses > > Dear all, > > I've sent a note to a couple of Canadian municipalities about getting > permission to use the open data they publish in OpenStreetMap. I'll let > you know the responses. If I haven't said anything about this in a few > weeks, please remind me. > > The history of ad-hoc licenses and terms of use, the relatively new > state of international data law and the international scope of OSM make > it hard to "just accept" their ad-hoc licenses. Or to judge them as > compatible. I hope that those publishers will say the equivalent of, > "yes, we want you to include our municipal data in OSM", and then we can > rely upon that. > > Presuming that permission is granted, the usual import guidelines will > still apply. :-) But having more sources is better than having fewer > sources. (Unless you have to choose among multiple disagreeing > sources.) > > I've added their attribution messages to the wiki[1] so that they can > see how we'll credit them. > > Best regards, > Richard > > [1] > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#Canadian_Municipalities > > _______________________________________________ > Talk-ca mailing list > Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca _______________________________________________ Talk-ca mailing list Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca
