<div dir="ltr">I have a statement from the city that the ODBL and ODL are inline and pose no issues from the city's stand point.<div><br></div><div><a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/Plan#Explicit_permission">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:Ontario:Ottawa/Import/Plan#Explicit_permission</a><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Stewart C. Russell <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:scruss@gmail.com" target="_blank">scruss@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi James -<br>
<span class=""><br>
> Yet it's the same as the Vancouver one that has been approved, and had<br>
> data imported....<br>
<br>
</span>Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the way that OSM needs to work.<br>
The licences aren't the same: you can't use Vancouver's agreement to<br>
bind the City of Ottawa, and the Federal agreement doesn't hold Ottawa<br>
to anything about its data.<br>
<br>
The Vancouver data was available to OSM because Paul Norman and Adam<br>
Williamson[1] got an agreement from the city's Director, Access to<br>
Information stating that the city's data sets were released in<br>
accordance with the provincial Freedom of Information and Protection of<br>
Privacy Act[2].<br>
<br>
(I'd also recommend Paul Norman's notes on licence compatibility[3]<br>
linked from the OSM Vancouver page[4]: they explain why all these<br>
licenses aren't equivalent, and why it's so much work for us to accept<br>
them.)<br>
<br>
What I think - and I say think, because I'm learning too - needs to<br>
happen is that we ask the City's Access to Information officials:<br>
<br>
Can you please confirm in writing that the data sets<br>
* (name of data set 1) (url of data set 1)<br>
* (name of data set 2) (url of data set 2)<br>
* ...<br>
are released in accordance with the Ontario Municipal Freedom<br>
of Information and Protection of Privacy Act?<br>
<br>
With that confirmation in hand, and the LWG's confirmation (requested by<br>
me, yesterday) that the City's data licence 2.0 is compatible, then I<br>
think the matter should go away. Apologies if my approach has appeared<br>
to change: as I said, I'm learning as I go along.<br>
<br>
Best Wishes,<br>
Stewart<br>
<br>
References:<br>
<br>
[1]: “[Talk-ca] [Fwd: Compliance statement] - Vancouver address<br>
information cleared for OSM use”<br>
<<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2014-February/006037.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.<wbr>org/pipermail/talk-ca/2014-<wbr>February/006037.html</a>><br>
<br>
[2]: “Compliance statement”<br>
<<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/attachments/20140203/c3441d6a/attachment.mht" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.<wbr>org/pipermail/talk-ca/<wbr>attachments/20140203/c3441d6a/<wbr>attachment.mht</a>><br>
<br>
[3]: “[Talk-ca] Nanaimo OGL license”<br>
<<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ca/2013-December/005974.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.<wbr>org/pipermail/talk-ca/2013-<wbr>December/005974.html</a>><br>
<br>
[4]: “Canada:British Columbia:Vancouver”<br>
<<a href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada:British_Columbia:Vancouver#GIS_sources_by_city" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.openstreetmap.<wbr>org/wiki/Canada:British_<wbr>Columbia:Vancouver#GIS_<wbr>sources_by_city</a>><br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Talk-ca mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org">Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.openstreetmap.<wbr>org/listinfo/talk-ca</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div>外に遊びに行こう！</div></div>
</div>