> > While the WMF does not claim any rights in wikidata contents, it does not > make any representations (one way or the other) as to third party rights in > the data. As an illustration: you could dump all of OSM in to wikidata and > the WMF would not need to change or do anything. >
But the same works in reverse, doesn't it? Wikidata project, just like WP and OSM, is user contributable. If a user uploads data that violates project's license, it should be deleted. And for that reason, both Wikidata and OSM state the license under which the data is contributed and shared. If I make an edit to OSM by copying data from Google, wouldn't that be the same thing? > (CC0), but the reverse depends on if the OSM contributor agreed to > dedicate their edits to public domain. > > There is not really a practical and meaningful way in which an OSM > contributor could do that, outside of facts that they have surveyed > themselves and kept separate. > How I hate to diverge from the main topic, but alas... :) This does sound like a severe problem (that should be taken to a separate thread) - if I, as a user, set the Public Domain checkbox, my assumptions are that my contributions are PD. If I trace something based on some image data, I need to specify that source, otherwise I am in violation of the source's license. If I did not specify the source, and I checked the PD box, it can be assumed that I am donating under PD. If this is not the case, it is a violation of my contributor's rights - because otherwise my intention is not being honored (i want other people to be able to use my work unrestricted). If anyone wants to comment, please start a new thread :) > > Without it, OSM data is licensed under ODbL, and cannot be copied. We > should make it easier to detect what piece of OSM data is in PD. I do like > your USB analogy :) About names - you will be surprised to discover that MB > and other places are actively pursuing Wikidata integration because WD > tends to have a huge names list, possibly bigger than OSM itself? > > > That is nice for MB, but problematic in more than one way for OSM. > Please elaborate, I know of at least one more company that is actively doing that. Sigh, another side topic :D On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Simon Poole <si...@poole.ch> wrote: > [turning on broken record mode :-)] > On 20.09.2017 17:54, Yuri Astrakhan wrote: > > > > * Oleksiy, OSM can use any data from Wikidata because of the public domain > dedication > > While the WMF does not claim any rights in wikidata contents, it does not > make any representations (one way or the other) as to third party rights in > the data. As an illustration: you could dump all of OSM in to wikidata and > the WMF would not need to change or do anything. > > (CC0), but the reverse depends on if the OSM contributor agreed to > dedicate their edits to public domain. > > There is not really a practical and meaningful way in which an OSM > contributor could do that, outside of facts that they have surveyed > themselves and kept separate. > > Without it, OSM data is licensed under ODbL, and cannot be copied. We > should make it easier to detect what piece of OSM data is in PD. I do like > your USB analogy :) About names - you will be surprised to discover that MB > and other places are actively pursuing Wikidata integration because WD > tends to have a huge names list, possibly bigger than OSM itself? > > > That is nice for MB, but problematic in more than one way for OSM. > > Simon > >
_______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
