[OSM-legal-talk] Legal requirements of permissions to import into OSM
clifford at snowandsnow.us
Fri Jul 24 21:35:43 UTC 2015
I wonder if pointing the local governments to http://opendatacommons.org/
might be a good start. I've been considering providing some cities I've
contact with a link to Open Data Commons to help them make the right
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:11 AM, Svavar Kjarrval <svavar at kjarrval.is>
> Thanks for the response and the references.
> Maybe it's not as big as I think it is. While I would personally prefer
> the pure public domain or anything closest to it, the entities are
> sometimes reluctant to go that far. Some might accept CC0 (and PDDL
> wouldn't be valid) but there are some which would want to require
> attribution. Are there any CC-BY versions which have been determined to
> be acceptable or any other similar licences?
> I agree with your reluctancy to suggest the ODbL due to future licence
> changes. If the community decides to change the licence, there'd be so
> much overhead in getting all the entities which published under other
> (custom) licences to agree with the new one (even in principle). It's so
> easy for them to say no if they foresee many potential future actions on
> their part.
> Officials in Iceland don't usually regard granting such licences as a
> huge undertaking so they're very prone to suggest making due with
> granting the permission via e-mail in a fairly informal manner. If I
> were to require a signed paper, some of them might change their minds,
> so I'd rather not refuse those offers if I don't have to. The Icelandic
> courts have determined that agreements reached/conveyed via email can be
> binding but I don't know if that'd be valid under English law.
> - Svavar Kjarrval
> On 24/07/15 16:31, Simon Poole wrote:
> > I suspect the problem is not quite as large as you think it might be.
> > If they want to use a public licence, while it may not be actually
> > explicitly said anywhere, CC0 or the PDDL are naturally totally
> > For one offs/special permission I would suggest using
> > These are essentially the two standard routes we can take were we don't
> > need to make caveats about the data surviving a future licence change.
> > Naturally there may be other "non-standard" licences that are acceptable
> > and there is for example the ODbL which is usable, however has some
> > issues particularly wrt a future licence change (and some more on top of
> > that). But as said all tend to invoke additional complications which are
> > best avoided.
> > Simon
> legal-talk mailing list
> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
OpenStreetMap: Maps with a human touch
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the legal-talk