From erno at gispo.fi Mon Feb 6 08:55:46 2017 From: erno at gispo.fi (=?UTF-8?Q?Erno_M=C3=A4kinen?=) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 10:55:46 +0200 Subject: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY 4.0 and rights holder(s) explicit statement Message-ID: Hi, For example, for the CC-BY 3.0 Unported license the ODbL Compatibility in the OSM wiki states that it "is ODbL compatible if rights holder(s) explicitly states in writing that credit on the Contributors page is sufficient to fulfil attribution requirements including downstream use in works derived from OSM". I am wondering, though "status of CC-BY 4.0 is still under consideration by the LWG", if the statement for the CC-BY 3.0 Unported license is still true for the CC-BY 4.0 International license. -- Erno Mäkinen Gispo Oy erno at gispo.fi - GSM +358 50 505 7003 www.gispo.fi - www.facebook.com/GispoFinland/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From simon at poole.ch Mon Feb 6 21:32:23 2017 From: simon at poole.ch (Simon Poole) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 22:32:23 +0100 Subject: [OSM-legal-talk] CC-BY 4.0 and rights holder(s) explicit statement In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 06.02.2017 09:55, Erno Mäkinen wrote: > Hi, > > For example, for the CC-BY 3.0 Unported license the ODbL Compatibility > in the OSM wiki states that it "is ODbL compatible if rights holder(s) > explicitly states in writing that credit on the Contributors > page is sufficient > to fulfil attribution requirements including downstream use in works > derived from OSM". There is no licence compatibility page published by the OSMF. > > I am wondering, though "status of CC-BY 4.0 is still under > consideration by the LWG", if the statement for the CC-BY 3.0 Unported > license is still true for the CC-BY 4.0 International license. The LWG is in the process of issuing guidance on CC BY 4.0 as the page correctly states. It has not previously made any statement outside of that it hasn't made a statement on the suitability of CC BY 4.0 as an input licence for OSM. That is the current state of affairs. Simon > > -- > Erno Mäkinen > Gispo Oy > erno at gispo.fi - GSM +358 50 505 7003 > www.gispo.fi - www.facebook.com/GispoFinland/ > > > > _______________________________________________ > legal-talk mailing list > legal-talk at openstreetmap.org > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tobias.wendorff at tu-dortmund.de Mon Feb 27 09:56:38 2017 From: tobias.wendorff at tu-dortmund.de (Tobias Wendorff) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:56:38 +0100 Subject: [OSM-legal-talk] question about collective databases Message-ID: Hi there. First of all, I don't want to denounce the user for his work. I'm just curious and interested, whether this kind of licensing is possible. The user is informed about my intent to post the question in here. On this website, an OSM user has joined OpenStreetMap-data under ODbL with a dataset from the Federal Government for Geo-Information and Geodesy of Germany. This data is released under "GeoNutzV", which allows the content to be used by everyone for everything, but wants a "BY" attribution on each product including a special note, if the data has been edited. Furthermore, the author can revoke the need for attribution. It's also clearly allowed to mix the data with other datasets. http://opendata.blattspinat.com/ -> Zuordnung von Landkreisen zu Postleitzahlen (translation: "assignment of rural district to postal codes") The user released the final dataset under ODbL and gave this attribution: "ODbL © 2017 OpenStreetMap Contributers & © GeoBasis-DE / BKG 2015 (Daten verändert)" (last two words mean: "data has been changed"). Let's say, he didn't make any analysis to the OSM data to fix missing data, which would result in "Horizontal Layers" case. Is the result a simple collective database? Best regards, Tobias From chris_hormann at gmx.de Mon Feb 27 10:14:15 2017 From: chris_hormann at gmx.de (Christoph Hormann) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:14:15 +0100 Subject: [OSM-legal-talk] question about collective databases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <201702271114.15069.chris_hormann@gmx.de> On Monday 27 February 2017, Tobias Wendorff wrote: > > http://opendata.blattspinat.com/ > -> Zuordnung von Landkreisen zu Postleitzahlen > (translation: "assignment of rural district to postal codes") > > The user released the final dataset under ODbL and gave this > attribution: > "ODbL © 2017 OpenStreetMap Contributers & © GeoBasis-DE / BKG 2015 > (Daten verändert)" (last two words mean: "data has been changed"). > > Let's say, he didn't make any analysis to the OSM data to fix missing > data, which would result in "Horizontal Layers" case. Is the result > a simple collective database? I am not sure about the relevance of your question here. The data set you refer to is licensed under ODbL which is permissible for OSM data both in a collective database and a derivative database (or a produced work for that matter). -- Christoph Hormann http://www.imagico.de/ From tobias.wendorff at tu-dortmund.de Mon Feb 27 11:10:58 2017 From: tobias.wendorff at tu-dortmund.de (Tobias Wendorff) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 12:10:58 +0100 Subject: [OSM-legal-talk] question about collective databases In-Reply-To: <201702271114.15069.chris_hormann@gmx.de> References: <201702271114.15069.chris_hormann@gmx.de> Message-ID: <956c6925db15cf4c681a51966c63d0b3.squirrel@webmail.tu-dortmund.de> Am Mo, 27.02.2017, 11:14 schrieb Christoph Hormann: > > I am not sure about the relevance of your question here. You're right, this isn't an ODbL mailing list. I'm sorry.