<div dir="ltr">Is that (second sentence) word for word the same response you got the first time, where they thought they'd have to relicense under the ODbL?<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra">P.S. sorry about not replying all with my last email.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:31 PM, Joel H. <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:95.5.radio@gmail.com" target="_blank">95.5.radio@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>OK everyone, Here is the feedback I got after asking for
permission to use CC-BY 4.0 datasets:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Thank you for your enquiry regarding use of the localities
boundaries dataset in OpenStreetMap.<br>
The Department has given consideration to your request and
advise that, consistent with Queensland Government policy, our
data is provided under a CC:BY 4.0 licence. The Department will
not provide the data under an Open Database licence. It is our
belief that a CC:BY licence is sufficient for use of our data<br>
</p>
</blockquote><div><div class="h5">
<br>
<div class="m_26558026673906578moz-cite-prefix">On 12/03/18 14:27, Jonathon Rossi
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Could you please share their response or paraphrase
it so we can all understand their reasons.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks, Jono</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 2:24 PM Joel H. <<a href="mailto:95.5.radio@gmail.com" target="_blank">95.5.radio@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Hi,</p>
<p>I tried again, and got rejected again. I had contact with
someone behind a local GIS company who said he would try
to help. But I haven't heard back. So I've put it to rest
for now...<br>
</p>
<p>I guess we should advocate for more compatibility with
CC-BY 4.0 in our licence.<br>
</p>
</div>
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> <br>
<div class="m_26558026673906578m_-8622631802656532159moz-cite-prefix">On
12/03/18 13:35, Jonathon Rossi wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">Joel,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Did you get a response from DNRM? Are you still in
talks with them?</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 10:07 PM Jonathon
Rossi <<a href="mailto:jono@jonorossi.com" target="_blank">jono@jonorossi.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>Great to hear Joel, I was actually wondering
last night if you'd already sent this off.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I'm not an expert in this area so happy for
others to correct me, however my reading of your
description of the second section that DNRM needs
to waive doesn't explain to someone not familiar
with what we are requesting, I think DNRM staff
are likely to think this is still too hard and
push back yet again. I like <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/d/df/NSW_GNB_170427_OpenStreetMap.pdf" target="_blank">Andrew
Harvey's description here</a> of both sections
including the extended part of section 2, maybe he
will give permission to use his description.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regarding who has signed the waiver:</div>
<div>- According to the contributors page for <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attribution/data.brisbane.qld.gov.au_explicit_permission" target="_blank">BCC</a> it
appears they haven't signed the waiver because it
didn't exist until early 2017 but it appears they
gave explicit permission to incorporate and
publish their CC-BY data under an ODbL, more than
the waiver requires<br>
</div>
<div>- The explicit permission from NSW Land and
Property Information sounds the same as the BCC
one giving more permission than OSMF now needs<br>
</div>
<div>- The NSW Geographical Name Register have <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/d/df/NSW_GNB_170427_OpenStreetMap.pdf" target="_blank">signed
the waiver</a></div>
<div>- Victoria DELWP have <a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/e/ed/Vicmap_CCBYPermission_OSM_Final_Jan2018_Ltr.pdf" target="_blank">signed
the waiver</a></div>
<div>- SA and MRWA seem to have explicitly agreed
with the same sort of thing BCC and NSW LPI did</div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I don't know if there was some sort of
informal/old waiver or explicit permission
template because the older ones are pretty
similar, they obviously aren't explicit about
Section 2(a)(5)(B) though. If that is the case
I'd amend your list of who has signed the
waiver, maybe even consider linking to the NSW
GNR and Victoria DELWP signed waivers proving
the claim.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Hope that helps, Jono</div>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">On Thu, Feb 1, 2018 at 9:09 PM
Joel H. <<a href="mailto:95.5.radio@gmail.com" target="_blank">95.5.radio@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>Hi All! I have made a response to DNRM,
regarding the licensing for locality
boarders. Please give a critique before
I send!<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><i>Hello [NAME],</i><i><br>
</i><i><br>
</i><i>Thank you for your time and
consideration regarding the approval
for OpenStreetMap.</i><i><br>
</i><i><br>
</i><i>As a response to your concern
over the licence change, it isn’t
necessary for DNRM data to be
re-licenced as a result of usage in
OpenStreetMap. It’s simply about
signing a waiver to clarify minor
differences in licences. Approving
usage in OSM shouldn’t tamper with the
goals of DNRM since OSM uses a very
similar licence with many of the same
philosophical views.</i><i><br>
</i><i><br>
</i><i>The first part that needs
approval is whether or not you think
our method of Attribution, is
sufficient with the “reasonable
manner” requirement of the CC-BY 4.0.
We credit sources through the
following page: <a class="m_26558026673906578m_-8622631802656532159m_757410680935543674m_-8501875726109946626moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors" target="_blank">http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/<wbr>wiki/Contributors</a>,
It’s also possible to add sources to
the objects which are DNRM’s data.</i><i><br>
</i><i><br>
</i><i>The second is to waive Section
2(a)(5)(B) of the CC</i><i><br>
</i><i>BY 4.0 license as to
OpenStreetMap and its users with the
understanding that</i><i><br>
</i><i>the Open Database License 1.0
requires open access or parallel
distribution of</i><i><br>
</i><i>OpenStreetMap data.</i><i><br>
</i><i><br>
</i><i>Many organisations such as
Brisbane City Council and New South
Wales Land and Property Information,
have already given permission in the
same way that DNRM could.</i><i><br>
</i><i><br>
</i><i>I hope you take the time to
reconsider. I’ve attached the PDF that
is needed for your review, keep in
touch.</i><i><br>
</i><i><br>
</i><i><br>
</i><i>Joel Hansen</i><i><br>
</i><i>Local OpenStreetMap Editor</i><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-bottom:0cm;line-height:100%"><br>
</p>
</div>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Talk-au mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-au@openstreetmap.org" target="_blank">Talk-au@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.<wbr>org/listinfo/talk-au</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">Jono</div>
</div></div>