<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<br>
Mikel <br>
<br>
I believe there is a simple solution, please document the source
with the full text of the licence or with a statement by the lawyer
in question, since the later is unlikely to forthcoming (we probably
wouldn't do that either), its going to be the former. I find it
quite understandable that their is some uneasiness about agreeing
adhere to a licence that we can't actually read.<br>
<br>
Simon<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Am 29.08.2013 15:16, schrieb Mikel
Maron:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1377782207.31608.YahooMailNeo@web161703.mail.bf1.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:times
new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt">
<div><span><span style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family:
arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:
13.63636302947998px;">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'times new
roman', 'new york', times, serif; font-size:
16.363636016845703px;">Stephen</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</span></span></div>
<div style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-size:
13.63636302947998px; font-family: arial, helvetica,
sans-serif; background-color: transparent; font-style:
normal;"><span><span style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69);
font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:
13.63636302947998px;">> What happens if they suddenly
decide </span><br style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69);
font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:
13.63636302947998px;">
<span style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: arial,
helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px;">>
that this use is not covered as it's neither humanitarian
nor </span><br style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family:
arial, helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:
13.63636302947998px;">
<span style="color: rgb(69, 69, 69); font-family: arial,
helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 13.63636302947998px;">>
non-commercial?</span></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The areas when NextView
imagery is made available to HOT/OSM are clearly
humanitarian need driven. NextView is a USG license and the
interpretation is by their lawyers. Their is clear and full
understanding by USG that data digitized into OSM is made
available under the ODbL, which allows commercial use. There
is not an issue here.</span></div>
<div><span style="font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</span></div>
<div><span style="font-size: 12pt;">> </span><span
style="font-size: 12pt;">So if it's not possible to add
anything to the NextView license: Can we</span><span
style="font-size: 12pt;"> </span></div>
> have a letter from them confirming they fully understand
what will <br>
> happen with the data in OSM and they still consider it
being OK and <br>
> covered by their license?
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This is stated on their website at <a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://hiu.state.gov/ittc/ittc.aspx">https://hiu.state.gov/ittc/ittc.aspx</a> (Description
tab).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If this is still not clear to you Stephen, please contact
me directly on Skype (mikelmaron) and I will clear up any
confusion.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Mikel</div>
<div><br>
<div><span style="font-size: 12pt;">* Mikel Maron
* +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron</span><br>
</div>
<div><br>
<blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255);
margin-left: 5px; margin-top: 5px; padding-left: 5px;">
<div style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york',
times, serif; font-size: 12pt;">
<div style="font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york',
times, serif; font-size: 12pt;">
<div dir="ltr">
<hr size="1"> <font face="Arial" size="2"> <b><span
style="font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b>
Stephan Knauss <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:osm@stephans-server.de"><osm@stephans-server.de></a><br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b>
Kate Chapman <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:kate@maploser.com"><kate@maploser.com></a>; Licensing
and other legal discussions.
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org"><legal-talk@openstreetmap.org></a> <br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Cc:</span></b>
OSMF License Working Group
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:legal@osmfoundation.org"><legal@osmfoundation.org></a>; hot
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:hot@openstreetmap.org"><hot@openstreetmap.org></a> <br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Sent:</span></b>
Thursday, August 29, 2013 2:27 AM<br>
<b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Subject:</span></b>
Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [HOT] Imagery license
clarification needed<br>
</font> </div>
<div class="y_msg_container"><br>
Hello Kate,<br>
<br>
On 29.08.2013 02:24, Kate Chapman wrote:<br>
>> For OSM to be on the safe side: Would it be
possible to document the<br>
>> permissions you have for tracing in a
clearly understandable way in the<br>
>> wiki? The current license text leaves a bit
of uncertainty what a derived<br>
>> imagery product is.<br>
><br>
> I can document in the wiki my understanding of
it. The legal<br>
> interpretation of the US government by their
own lawyers that the<br>
> initial use of the derived vectors need to be
for humanitarian use,<br>
> after that it is fine to remain under the ODbL
license in OSM. The<br>
> reason for this is the US Government-wide
license for commercial<br>
> satellite imagery is not supposed to cut into
potential commercial<br>
> sales of that imagery. So it would not be
possible to release that<br>
> imagery for what would be initially a
commercial use.<br>
><br>
>><br>
>> So why not simply add a clause saying
"Imagery is used by the members of the<br>
>> HOT for providing humanitarian aid as
expressed in our policy. Derived data<br>
>> will be stored in the Openstretmap database
in accordance with the<br>
>> contributor terms and is available under
the ODbL also after end of the<br>
>> humanitarian project".<br>
><br>
> The NextView license is the US Government-wide
license utilized for<br>
> commercial satellite imagery. It is not going
to be possible to add a<br>
> clause to it.<br>
<br>
I appreciate your work for HOT and like the idea
that OSM data is used <br>
to really improve the situation of people.<br>
<br>
However, reading this it sounds to me we (as OSM)
fully rely on the <br>
legal interpretation of USG lawyers of what use of
derived vectors is <br>
allowed.<br>
<br>
What happens if a year after providing the imagery
they realize that <br>
there are companies selling processed data based on
OSM and this data is <br>
based on imagery released for HOT. What happens if
they suddenly decide <br>
that this use is not covered as it's neither
humanitarian nor <br>
non-commercial?<br>
Would we have to revert large scale of date and all
additions built on <br>
top of it?<br>
<br>
I'm much in favor of having the data donor fully
understand of what are <br>
the consequences of their donation. So they can
agree to that and not <br>
feel tricked into something later. And the OSM
community can build their <br>
improvements on a solid foundation.<br>
<br>
So if it's not possible to add anything to the
NextView license: Can we <br>
have a letter from them confirming they fully
understand what will <br>
happen with the data in OSM and they still consider
it being OK and <br>
covered by their license? Should be not problem at
all if they <br>
understood it in the beginning...<br>
<br>
If they have issues about handing out a letter
confirming commercial use <br>
of OSM data derived from their imagery being fine
then we can't accept <br>
their imagery either.<br>
<br>
I understand that you probably interpret the license
in favor for HOT, <br>
but if this is tainting the data in OSM we have to
find a different <br>
solution for HOT - wost case keeping this data
separate.<br>
<br>
To make it fully clear: I'm not talking about the
imagery. I'm talking <br>
about the vector data derived from the imagery. It
is absolutely fine if <br>
the imagery is only available to members of the HOT
and they use it <br>
only for the humanitarian case for which they had
been provided, after <br>
completion of the job the imagery can be removed
again.<br>
But the vector data has to be available for OSM
under the regulations of <br>
our contributor terms. Meaning available as ODbL or
any other license we <br>
might switch to in the future.<br>
<br>
Stephan<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
legal-talk mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
ymailto="mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org"
href="mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org">legal-talk@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk"
target="_blank">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk</a><br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
legal-talk mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:legal-talk@openstreetmap.org">legal-talk@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk">http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>