That is incredibly encouraging news, congrats on the win! A few years back I started a small discussion on Talk-US on whether or not the NYC data license was usable as it has a very similar, if not identical, clause in their own license (The conclusion was the same as yours).
I'm curious if this is perhaps a term that Socrata offers in their configuration that cities and municipalities opt-in for. In any case, thanks for sharing this news.. Definitely something I'll add to my mental list of open data success stories :) -Skye On Feb 20, 2013, at 10:31 PM, Ian Dees <ian.d...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi imports, > > Earlier last year I downloaded the Chicago building footprints shapefile [0] > from the Chicago data portal, chopped it into manageable bits and started > importing it into OSM. Halfway through the process of merging and uploading > this data I read the data portal's license [1] closer, discovering a clause > that makes the datasets offered there incompatible with OSM. The troublesome > clause allows the City of Chicago to require removal of any City data at any > point in the future: > > "The City may require a user of this data to terminate any and all display, > distribution or other use of any or all of the data provided at this website > for any reason including, without limitation, violation of these Terms of Use > or other terms as defined by City agencies or departments contributing data > to this website." > > When I noticed this I immediately stopped uploading data and began a > conversation with the city's data team to discuss ways OSM could move forward > with using the datasets listed on the portal. > > After several months of phone calls, meetings, and waiting, I'm pleased to > announce that the City of Chicago has started to release some of its datasets > under the MIT license on GitHub: [2]. > > As a result of this new license, I will be able to continue importing the > excellent buildings and address data into OSM (more on that later) and > businesses will be able to use this data in their apps and tools without > worrying about an untested license. > > I'm pretty excited about this, as Chicago is seen as a leader in municipal > data and other OSM/Open Data folks can point to this as proof that open > licensing is a very important part of open data. > > -Ian > > [0] https://data.cityofchicago.org/Buildings/Building-Footprints/w2v3-isjw > [1] http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/narr/foia/data_disclaimer.html > [2] https://github.com/chicago/ > _______________________________________________ > Talk-us mailing list > Talk-us@openstreetmap.org > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
_______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
