[OSM-legal-talk] Paid services from OSM

SteveC steve at asklater.com
Sat Sep 27 16:54:10 BST 2008


Fantastic Peter, can't wait for your input.

Best

Steve

On 27 Sep 2008, at 07:12, Peter Miller wrote:

>
> Let me answer from the perspective of the new licence that is in
> preparation.
>
> My company intends to charge for services using OSM data, not traffic
> related, but our situations are similar from a legal perspective.
>
> We are currently reviewing the new proposed OSM licence in draft  
> form and my
> company has just commissioned legal advice on this in order to  
> confirm that
> it is suitable for our business. We will also provide input into the
> drafting process as necessary.
>
> My understanding of the new licence is as follows:
>
> The OSM Database will be available on a share-alike by attribution  
> licence.
>
> Any 'Derivative Work' created from the OSM Database will also need  
> to be
> made available for free on a similar 'share-alike by attribution'  
> licence
> (so for example if you spot a problem in the OSM database and change  
> it
> internally in your copy of the DB then this is a Derivative Work and  
> as soon
> as you make services or products using this data available to the  
> public
> then you have to make the Derivative DB available to the public in a
> accessible way.
>
> If however you create a 'Collective Database' consisting of the  
> unaltered
> OSM Database and one of more other independent and distinct datasets  
> then
> you do not have to publish the integrated dataset (but you still do  
> have to
> publish any changes you make to the OSM component, the 'derivative
> datasbase') and you have to acknowledge the source of the OSM  
> component.
>
> Ok, so you should be able to import the OSM dataset, change it,  
> publish it
> as share-alike, but you should then be able to merge it with other  
> datasets,
> possibly containing your traffic data (assuming that this speed data
> constitutes an 'independent and distinct dataset) and you are set up  
> with
> the data for your service.
>
> Now you can put your paid-for service on top of this. My  
> understanding is
> that this is entirely ok and you can charge whatever people will pay  
> and put
> it behind fire-walls and passwords as much as you like. You are  
> charging for
> the processing and the service, not the data and you are making the  
> OSM
> component of your data available FOC using a suitable SA licence.
>
> It is also my understanding that that any maps or visualisations or  
> analysis
> generated from this dataset using this new licence can be  
> copyrighted, this
> means that you can produce software or services to produce beautiful
> rendering of the OSM data together with other data and you can  
> protect this
> work and possibly try to sell it.
>
> There is a 'but' here, and it is a big but. It is this one; since  
> the same
> OSM data that you are using is also available to people offering free
> services and given that the OSM community if very dynamic and clever  
> then
> you are going to be competing with 'free', so your product/service had
> better be good enough, if not then you are going to get trampled, or  
> worse
> just ignored!
>
> In summary, I think this licence will be very good for the project  
> for a
> number of reasons.
>
> 1) It gives much stronger protection to the OSM database and ensures  
> that
> additions are published in a format that will be available and  
> useable by
> the wider community.
>
> 2) It clarifies the rules around combining OSM data with other  
> datasets,
> some of which have different licence terms.
>
> 3) It creates a much clearer situation for people wishing to use OSM  
> data
> for commercial services. These commercial users should then become  
> strong
> supporters of the project itself with all sorts of potential  
> benefits to the
> OSM.
>
> I should be more informed by the end of next week when we have had  
> some
> answers from the lawyer and I should then be able to help bring the  
> new
> licence to a successful conclusion.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
>
> Peter Miller
> CEO, Ito World Ltd
> http://www.itoworld.com
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: legal-talk-bounces at openstreetmap.org [mailto:legal-talk-
>> bounces at openstreetmap.org] On Behalf Of legal-talk-
>> request at openstreetmap.org
>> Sent: 27 September 2008 12:00
>> To: legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> Subject: [Spam] legal-talk Digest, Vol 25, Issue 24
>>
>> Send legal-talk mailing list submissions to
>> 	legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> 	http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> 	legal-talk-request at openstreetmap.org
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> 	legal-talk-owner at openstreetmap.org
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of legal-talk digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>>   1. Re: [OSM-dev] Paid services from OSM (Iv?n S?nchez Ortega)
>>   2. Re: [OSM-dev] Paid services from OSM (Frederik Ramm)
>>   3. Re: [OSM-dev] Paid services from OSM (Iv?n S?nchez Ortega)
>>   4. Re: [OSM-dev] Paid services from OSM (Frederik Ramm)
>>
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 17:14:49 +0200
>> From: Iv?n S?nchez Ortega <ivan at sanchezortega.es>
>> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-dev] Paid services from OSM
>> To: legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> Cc: dev at openstreetmap.org, Julison <julisonbr at gmail.com>
>> Message-ID: <200809261714.52366.ivan at sanchezortega.es>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> El Viernes, 26 de Septiembre de 2008, Julison escribi?:
>>> Hi all,
>>> I'm not sure it this list is the correct place to post that  
>>> question,
>> but
>>> there it goes:
>>
>> No - the correct list is legal-talk, so please follow up the  
>> conversation
>> there.
>>
>>> I'm developing a traffic info service as a layer into OpenStreetMap,
>>> primarily for Sao Paulo, Brazil.. I'm in a very beginning in that
>> project.
>> [...]
>>> My question is: Can I legally charge a service that it will run  
>>> over a
>>> OpenSource (and free) service, if I provide extras info that doesn't
>> exist
>>> in OpenStreetMaps?
>>
>> Short answer: yes.
>>
>>
>> Long answer: The majority of license-aware OSM users do believe  
>> that, as
>> long
>> as you keep the information layers separate, the attribution of both
>> layers
>> separate, and a normal user can tell apart which is which, putting  
>> several
>> layers together is not considered a derivative work but a  
>> collaborative
>> work,
>> and the CC-by-sa license does not have to be enforced to turn the  
>> other
>> layers into CC-bt-sa -covered material.
>>
>> Even if the CC-by-sa license would ever "contaminate" your traffic  
>> and
>> routing
>> data, the license does not have the "nc" component, so you'd be  
>> able to
>> charge money (though in the worst case, you'd have to release  
>> traffic data
>> under CC-by-sa after you're charged for it).
>>
>>
>>
>> (eu lamento que n~ao peguei o meu GPS quando fui para al? - si  
>> n~ao, agora
>> Trindade ficar?a no mapa)
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> --
>> ----------------------------------
>> Iv?n S?nchez Ortega <ivan at sanchezortega.es>
>>
>> Don't look back, the lemmings are gaining on you.
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>> Name: not available
>> Type: application/pgp-signature
>> Size: 197 bytes
>> Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
>> Url : http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-
>> talk/attachments/20080926/23beb2b6/attachment-0001.pgp
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 00:26:36 +0200
>> From: Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>
>> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-dev] Paid services from OSM
>> To: "Licensing and other legal discussions."
>> 	<legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
>> Cc: dev at openstreetmap.org, Julison <julisonbr at gmail.com>
>> Message-ID: <48DD619C.4070407 at remote.org>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Iv?n S?nchez Ortega wrote:
>>> putting several
>>> layers together is not considered a derivative work but a  
>>> collaborative
>> work,
>>
>> "collective"
>>
>> Bye
>> Frederik
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 3
>> Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2008 22:30:41 +0200
>> From: Iv?n S?nchez Ortega <ivan at sanchezortega.es>
>> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-dev] Paid services from OSM
>> To: legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> Message-ID: <200809262230.43619.ivan at sanchezortega.es>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>
>> El S?bado, 27 de Septiembre de 2008, Frederik Ramm escribi?:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Iv?n S?nchez Ortega wrote:
>>>> putting several
>>>> layers together is not considered a derivative work but a
>> collaborative
>>>> work,
>>>
>>> "collective"
>>
>> /me bangs head against wall repeteadly.
>>
>> --
>> ----------------------------------
>> Iv?n S?nchez Ortega <ivan at sanchezortega.es>
>>
>> El recuerdo es el ?nico para?so del cual no podemos ser expulsados.
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>> Name: not available
>> Type: application/pgp-signature
>> Size: 197 bytes
>> Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
>> Url : http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-
>> talk/attachments/20080926/f628d160/attachment-0001.pgp
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 4
>> Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2008 00:53:48 +0200
>> From: Frederik Ramm <frederik at remote.org>
>> Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] [OSM-dev] Paid services from OSM
>> To: Iv?n S?nchez Ortega <ivan at sanchezortega.es>
>> Cc: legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> Message-ID: <48DD67FC.3040808 at remote.org>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Iv?n S?nchez Ortega wrote:
>>> /me bangs head against wall repeteadly.
>>
>> Don't. The Foundation has already budgeted your head for 2009.
>>
>> Bye
>> Frederik
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> legal-talk mailing list
>> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>>
>>
>> End of legal-talk Digest, Vol 25, Issue 24
>> ******************************************
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>





More information about the legal-talk mailing list