<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p>There's been no discussion here, so if any of the sources being
      used are problematic please do provide more detail so that we can
      deal with it.</p>
    <p>"More detail" would typically involve identifying non-compatible
      IP that had found its way into a dataset that would otherwise by
      licence-compatible with OSM.  I can think of plenty of UK examples
      of that sort of thing, but would need local knowledge for Canada.<br>
    </p>
    <p>Best Regards,</p>
    <p>Andy<br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16/04/2022 10:06, Andy Townsend
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
      cite="mid:0e77ab54-4128-205a-e7b6-ea1ce371225b@gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <p>Thanks for the replies.</p>
      <p>I'll raise this issue with the mapper concerned and suggest
        that they discuss in more detail here.</p>
      <p>Best Regards,</p>
      <p>Andy<br>
      </p>
      <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 16/04/2022 03:11, john whelan
        wrote:<br>
      </div>
      <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAJ-Ex1FCn7hpxjt0rQozZ7Q9x2bHqY5dR71etNLjqvqnKxvB5g@mail.gmail.com">
        <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
          charset=UTF-8">
        <div dir="auto">I seem to recall it took five years after I
          identified the licensing issue with a Treasury Board before
          they sorted out the licence and another two years before we
          managed to get the City of Ottawa to adopt the new license. 
          Stats came along part way through and were helpful in bringing
          it all together.  It also involved the Open Data group at
          Carleton University who identified data sets that could be
          used amongest other things.
          <div dir="auto"><br>
          </div>
          <div dir="auto">Cheerio John</div>
        </div>
        <br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">
          <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Apr 15, 2022, 9:51
            PM john whelan, <<a href="mailto:jwhelan0112@gmail.com"
              moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">jwhelan0112@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 dir="auto">I worked with stats Canada and the open data
              group within Federal government and with the city of
              Ottawa.
              <div dir="auto"><br>
              </div>
              <div dir="auto">The project was importing buildings into
                OSM, basically we had the Federal Government's licence
                together with the City of Ottawa's licence approved by
                the legal working group.  This was after both the
                Federal government and the city of Ottawa changed their
                licence to the new present one after it had been
                identified that both old licences were not suitable for
                import.</div>
              <div dir="auto"><br>
              </div>
              <div dir="auto">The City of Ottawa's licence is virtually
                the same as the Federal government one other than a few
                minor differences since one was a municipality and one
                Federal government.</div>
              <div dir="auto"><br>
              </div>
              <div dir="auto">The people I worked with at Stats were
                releasing data through the Federal government open data
                portal which has the full Federal government open data
                licence.  They may have released data through another
                portal with a different licence but anything released
                through the central open data portal is correctly
                licenced.  I understand CANVEC for example is now
                covered by this license.</div>
              <div dir="auto"><br>
              </div>
              <div dir="auto">It should be noted that a lot of effort
                went into ensuring the licences were acceptable. </div>
              <div dir="auto"><br>
              </div>
              <div dir="auto">I understand that Toronto's licence was
                submitted but I haven't followed who submitted it or how
                it got on.</div>
              <div dir="auto"><br>
              </div>
              <div dir="auto">Cheerio John</div>
            </div>
            <br>
            <div class="gmail_quote">
              <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Apr 15, 2022,
                21:27 Jarek Piórkowski <<a
                  href="mailto:jarek@piorkowski.ca" target="_blank"
                  rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true"
                  class="moz-txt-link-freetext">jarek@piorkowski.ca</a>>
                wrote:<br>
              </div>
              <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
                .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hello
                Andy,<br>
                <br>
                Regarding the licences themselves:<br>
                <br>
                Recent Statistics Canada data appears to be released
                under a<br>
                "Statistics Canada Open Licence" which can be found at<br>
                <a href="https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/reference/licence"
                  rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                  moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.statcan.gc.ca/en/reference/licence</a>.
                As far as I know this<br>
                has not been approved for importing to OSM. I do not
                know whether the<br>
                editor's activities would be considered an "import" or
                if the licence<br>
                is compatible for non-import use. The OSM wiki at<br>
                <a
href="https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada#Importing_government_data"
                  rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                  moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada#Importing_government_data</a><br>
                does say "Statistics Canada data is used to import
                street names where<br>
                they are missing from the other data sets. It is advised
                to not copy<br>
                the geometry; however, you can use the street names
                database as a<br>
                reference. " - I did not go through the page history to
                find when and<br>
                by whom this was added.<br>
                <br>
                The "Open Government Licence – Winnipeg" is, to my
                understanding, not<br>
                a suitable OSM import data license. This is a
                long-standing problem<br>
                with Canadian open data where licences with the
                government unit's name<br>
                in their name (here "Winnipeg") are considered by OSM a
                different<br>
                licence from the Open Government Licence even if all the
                words other<br>
                than the city name are the same. As far as I know only
                the Ottawa<br>
                community has gone through the (rather slow) process of
                getting<br>
                OGL-Ottawa approved as an OSM import licence. Same
                question about<br>
                whether the edits constitute an "import" applies.<br>
                <br>
                --Jarek<br>
                <br>
                On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 at 16:53, Andy Townsend <<a
                  href="mailto:ajt1047@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer
                  noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                  class="moz-txt-link-freetext">ajt1047@gmail.com</a>>
                wrote:<br>
                ><br>
                > Hello talk-ca people,<br>
                ><br>
                > Andy from the Data Working Group here.<br>
                ><br>
                > A new prolific mapper has recently popped up,
                adding road names in<br>
                > Canada and elsewhere.  It has been suggested to the
                DWG that many of the<br>
                > names used were just copied from sources that
                aren't licence-compatible<br>
                > with OSM, such as Google Maps.  Some responses to
                questions about map<br>
                > sources have been somewhat evasive (see e.g.<br>
                > <a
                  href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119735027"
                  rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                  moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119735027</a>
                ) but they now claim<br>
                > to be using sources such as:<br>
                ><br>
                > "City of Winnipeg Open Data Portal - Contains
                information licensed under<br>
                > the Open Government Licence – Winnipeg."<br>
                ><br>
                > <a
                  href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/734204653"
                  rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                  moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/734204653</a><br>
                ><br>
                > and<br>
                ><br>
                > "Statistics Canada Road Network File (RNF)"<br>
                ><br>
                > <a
                  href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/507685150"
                  rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                  moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/507685150</a><br>
                ><br>
                > (see <a
                  href="https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/119761959"
                  rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                  moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/119761959</a>
                for more)<br>
                ><br>
                > Do these sources check out as reasonable, and
                licence-compatible with<br>
                > OSM?  Also (and actually more important) are the
                latest edits by this<br>
                > user backed up by those sources?<br>
                ><br>
                > Normally of course OSM mappers have considerable
                freedom to map as they<br>
                > wish - we take a lot on trust, and don't check that
                every edit that was<br>
                > allegedly derived from a compatible imagery source
                actually was and<br>
                > wasn't from a non-compatible source instead.
                Unfortunately, in the case<br>
                > of this mapper (see previous interactions at e.g.<br>
                > <a
                  href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/PopeyePopcord/blocks"
                  rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                  moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/PopeyePopcord/blocks</a>
                and<br>
                > <a
                  href="https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/119735027"
                  rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                  moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/119735027</a>
                ) I think we need to have<br>
                > a soupçon of skepticism.<br>
                ><br>
                > Best Regards,<br>
                ><br>
                > Andy<br>
                ><br>
                ><br>
                ><br>
                > _______________________________________________<br>
                > Talk-ca mailing list<br>
                > <a href="mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org"
                  rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                  moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
                > <a
                  href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca"
                  rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                  moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca</a><br>
                <br>
                _______________________________________________<br>
                Talk-ca mailing list<br>
                <a href="mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org"
                  rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                  moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org</a><br>
                <a
                  href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca"
                  rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank"
                  moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca</a><br>
              </blockquote>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br>
        <fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
        <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-ca mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org" moz-do-not-send="true">Talk-ca@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca" moz-do-not-send="true">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca</a>
</pre>
      </blockquote>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>