<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/19/2021 5:28 PM, Mike Thompson
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CALJoUku0CpoQ1w3Hv48-c13LwTGc7HiMLx=yTS60UY414HcdXA@mail.gmail.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Dec 19, 2021 at 2:45
PM Mike N <<a href="mailto:niceman@att.net"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">niceman@att.net</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On 12/18/2021 6:56 PM,
Mike Thompson wrote:<br>
> However we're not offering the data for
sale....<br>
> <br>
> ODbL does not prohibit the same of data:<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> " Can I charge for distributing OSM data or data
derived from OSM<br>
> data?<br>
> <br>
> Yes. You can charge any amount of money you want for
any service or data <br>
> you provide. ...[0]<br>
> <br>
<br>
However when coupled with the Email, does this not count?
I've seen <br>
quite a number of import projects in the Wiki done on basis
of a <br>
permission Email only. Or does every license clause have to
have a <br>
lawyer write a waiver to override?<br>
</blockquote>
<div>I don't know either way. I am not a lawyer. It would be
good to get the opinion of someone within the OSM community
who is familiar with such matters. The email is very
general, it would be good if they explicitly said "we grant
you the right to import our data into OSM. We understand
OSM is licensed under ODbL and that ODbL may not be
compatible with the license originally provided with the
data" (I think there is suggested language on the Wiki), or
as you suggested earlier, if they agreed to a license
compatible with ODbL. It would be good to know that the
person making such statements were authorized by the county
to do so as well (presumably not every county employee is
authorized to modify data licenses).</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I am not trying to derail an otherwise good idea, I just
think this is something that we should look into to make
sure all is kosher. Perhaps posting to the imports list
would elicit some responses from people more informed than
I.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Mike</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Talk-us@openstreetmap.org">Talk-us@openstreetmap.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us">https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<p>In the USA, county level agencies must follow state law regarding
public records access. Quick google search for new jersey public
records law - first few links tell you all you need to know. First
link is a document that pretty much spells it all out, even with
FAQs. A key issue is whether the state allows government agencies
operating under state law to copyright data and/or charge high
prices for it. Search the PDF for copyright and you get one hit,
where it says copyright law does not prohibit access. The other
issue is exemptions to public records access. Some states make GIS
data "special" - like Georgia and apply special terms to it. It
looks like New Jersey does not. Another link provides the full
text of the law to review.<br>
</p>
<p>Brian aka grouper<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>