[Imports] Fwd: Marin County data license

Carl Anderson carl.anderson at vadose.org
Fri Oct 31 19:45:15 UTC 2014


When you do go to the LWG it might be good to consider Florida's Sunshine
Law at the same time.  It has similar considerations.

C

On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 2:32 PM, Serge Wroclawski <emacsen at gmail.com> wrote:

> Carl,
>
> Thanks for this great insight via this case.Reading through the pdf,
> and not being a lawyer, a few things stand out at me.
>
> Firstly, there's no definition by the court of what public means in
> this case. Public data might mean that the data is available to access
> but not to use, or that it's copyrighted but made available.
>
> Secondly, while we could argue that this data should be made available
> under certain terms, it's really up to the city to do. While "It
> should be available under these terms" is a good defense if we decide
> to use it w/o the city's terms, we still need the city to say the data
> is available under certain terms.
>
> I think this is something the LWG will need to decide. Alternatively,
> it would be best if the city simply clarified its position.
>
> Putting this in context, in relation to NYC, I got 6 different answers
> about license for data from 4 different people, all while the data
> should have been made under a very liberal license (essentially public
> domain).
>
> - Serge
>
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:51 AM, Carl Anderson <carl.anderson at vadose.org>
> wrote:
> > I think that California's Public Records Act may have some bearing,
> limiting
> > the restrictions that can be placed on the data by Marin County.
> > That Public Records Act seems to indicate that the GIS data is Public
> Data.
> >
> > Sierra Club vs. Orange County
> > http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S194708.PDF
> >
> >
> http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=gov&group=06001-07000&file=6250-6270
> >
> >
> > C.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Dan S <danstowell+osm at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Serge,
> >>
> >> It reads to me as if the "must" is a condition on the use of the name
> >> "MarinMap", not a condition on the use of the data.
> >>
> >> Best
> >> Dan
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014-10-31 11:08 GMT+00:00 Serge Wroclawski <emacsen at gmail.com>:
> >> > The minute you use the word "MUST", it's not a request, it's a demand.
> >> > If the data was public domain, there would be no restrictions.
> >> >
> >> > Also, no where on the page does it use the word "Public domain", nor
> >> > in any of the data I downloaded, does it have a license listed.
> >> >
> >> > Therefore it falls back to plain old copyright.
> >> >
> >> > - Serge
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 7:06 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer
> >> > <dieterdreist at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> 2014-10-31 11:54 GMT+01:00 Serge Wroclawski <emacsen at gmail.com>:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> So let me explain why it's contradictory. Public domain is a term of
> >> >>> art. If something is public domain, you can place *no* restrictions
> on
> >> >>> it. You can't say that there's a requirement for attribution. You
> can
> >> >>> even take a public domain work and claim copyright ownership over
> it.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> Serge, by looking at their reply I'm not sure it contains any
> >> >> restrictions:
> >> >>
> >> >>> "You may download public domain data from the MarinMap GIS data
> >> >>> download
> >> >>> site.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> You do not need a license to use public domain data.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> You may acknowledge “MarinMap” as the original source, but you MUST
> >> >>> state
> >> >>> that MarinMap has no responsibility or warranty regarding data after
> >> >>> they
> >> >>> have entered the public domain.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> You may use the legalese from the disclaimer web page to facilitate
> >> >>> writing a disclaimer.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> URL of the disclaimer page:
> >> >>> http://www.marinmap.org/dnn/Pages/LegalNoticeDisclaimer.aspx"
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> They say you might (even though you don't have to) attribute them,
> but
> >> >> if
> >> >> you attribute you must make clear that there is no implied warranty.
> >> >>
> >> >> On the linked page they also state: "Most map data, especially
> parcels,
> >> >> are
> >> >> not survey precise."
> >> >> this is a hint that the quality might not be as good as what we
> >> >> typically
> >> >> have in OSM (at least in areas which haven't suffered from bad
> imports)
> >> >>
> >> >> cheers,
> >> >> Martin
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Imports mailing list
> >> > Imports at openstreetmap.org
> >> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Imports mailing list
> >> Imports at openstreetmap.org
> >> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/attachments/20141031/25b4fc29/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Imports mailing list