[OSM-legal-talk] License clarification question

[Peter Miller]

On 19 Dec 2008, at 08:08, Sebastian Kurfürst wrote:

> Hello everybody,
>
> I am working for a small startup company which wants to provide
> geographical information for tourism areas. We intend to produce an
> online map-widget like you have at your website, and want to add a
> custom overlay of touristically relevant POIs (Hotels, Guest houses,
> Restaurants, ...). If you click onto one of these overlay icons, there
> will be a popup with additional information, photos, prices, opening
> hours, ...
> The POI information is stored separately (in a separate Database
> table) from the OSM-based way / polygon data.

Sounds a bit like how wikitravel (http://wikitravel.org/en/Main_Page)  
are using OSM. I understand that they cross-reference the locations of  
features on OSM with additional information on wikitravel.

>
>
> We are currently evaluating the use of OpenStreetMap data as a basis
> (for roads, hiking trails, ...)
>
> Now my questions:
> - Do I get it right that the current license is CC-by-SA 2.0? And you
> want to switch to the new Open Data License? Is there any timeframe
> when this switch will be done?
>

Yes we do. According to the draft minutes of the last OpenStreetMap  
Foundation board meeting (http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcs6phhk_35dkhtq2dj 
) it will be published in 6 days time (ie 'by Xmas')! However I don't  
believe it is ready but unfortunately we are starved on information  
about progress on the licence on this list for some reason which is  
regrettable.


> - As I understood it, we'll have to publish all of our modifications /
> additions on the underlying OpenStreetmap Data, f.e. as JOSM XML file.
> We are happy that this information can flow back to the OpenStreetMap
> project :-)
> Is this correct as I see it?


good

>
>
> - However, the POI information (where the POI is located, and the
> additional meta-data which is displayed in some kind of "popup
> bubble") does not have to be published under the same CC-by-SA license
> - is this correct?
That is the intention.

Using the CCBYSA licence I believe this should be ok. The two works  
are distinct and your should updated OSM for the map features but do  
not need to release your other data as this is a 'collective work'. I  
haven't taken  legal advice on this point because we are meant to be  
dropping the licence soon.

With the new licence I believe this will also be a possible however I  
have not been able to see any recent drafts of the licence so can't  
give any more reassurance.. See the proposed Use Cases for the new  
licence which I see as the 'requirements' document for the new licence  
and have it clear that this should be allowed. (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brief_for_proposed_OSM_licence 
).


>
> If the meta-data needs to be published under the CC-by-SA license as
> well, that would be a major issue for our company - that's why some
> clarifications would be really nice.
>

Me too, hence my interest in this frustrating process!

> Thanks a lot for your help,
> you OpenStreetMap guys rock,
> Sebastian
>

Sorry for the semi-rant. I am, however, still a keen supporter of this  
fantastic project and I do think we are actually getting pretty close  
to having a sound new licence.

Btw, my company is keen on building a community of commercial  
companies with an interest in OSM to represent our shared interests so  
do lets keep in touch.



Regards,


Peter Miller
ITO World Ltd
www.itoworld.com


>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk