[OSM-legal-talk] legal-talk Digest, Vol 144, Issue 8

JS grimpeur78 at gmail.com
Wed Aug 14 10:09:09 UTC 2019



Hi everyone,

Thanks for your prompt replies. I'll send them a mail asking for explicit permission then. If I get a positive reply, I'll involve the import and talk-us lists before proceeding.

Best,
Jan

>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 13:41:45 +0200
>From: Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch>
>To: legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Houston, TX, open data policy license
>	compliance
>Message-ID: <f1dea99a-cce2-ddd0-a3cc-4642dfd10b42 at poole.ch>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>While the policy is undoutably good, it does not follow that all data
>published actually conforms to it (for example third party rights in
>existing data could be an issue).
>
>In any case on data.houstontx.gov the licence is specified for 7
>datasets, so I assume the intent is to do that for all over time (you
>should ask).
>
>The related problem is that you will need to obtain a waiver for CC BY
>material as CC BY is in many ways more restrictive than the ODbL (see
>https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/).
>
>Simon
>
>Am 13.08.2019 um 08:24 schrieb JS:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> The city of Houston has published several open data sets at
>> data.houstontx.gov and cohgis-mycity.opendata.arcgis.com/. While the
>> data sets and open data websites do not contain any licensing-related
>> text, there's a general open data policy at
>> http://www.houstontx.gov/adminpolicies/8-7.html.
>>
>> Am I right to assume that this policy, in particular the definition
>of
>> "open data" at No 6, is sufficiently clear so as to use the data
>> without further permission?
>>
>> Thanks for your opinions!
>>
>> Best,
>> Jan
>> -- 
>> Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> legal-talk mailing list
>> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL:
><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20190813/9fea741b/attachment-0001.html>
>-------------- next part --------------
>A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>Name: signature.asc
>Type: application/pgp-signature
>Size: 488 bytes
>Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
>URL:
><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20190813/9fea741b/attachment-0001.sig>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 14:42:55 -0700
>From: Kathleen Lu <kathleen.lu at mapbox.com>
>To: "Licensing and other legal discussions."
>	<legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
>Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Houston, TX, open data policy license
>	compliance
>Message-ID:
>	<CAFekdnBKj2w8wT_rpuB6aOgTRtJSLqtNzbQbDnNK87-xs6tCuQ at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>Hi Jan,
>Specifically, here's is an example of the Geographic Boundaries page
>that
>indicates a CC-BY license:
>http://data.houstontx.gov/group/geographic-boundaries
>On the left side, at the bottom of the list of information. I would
>surmise
>that this applies to all the geographic boundary datasets, but you can
>ask
>them for clarification.
>Best,
>Kathleen
>
>On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 4:43 AM Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:
>
>> While the policy is undoutably good, it does not follow that all data
>> published actually conforms to it (for example third party rights in
>> existing data could be an issue).
>>
>> In any case on data.houstontx.gov the licence is specified for 7
>> datasets, so I assume the intent is to do that for all over time (you
>> should ask).
>>
>> The related problem is that you will need to obtain a waiver for CC
>BY
>> material as CC BY is in many ways more restrictive than the ODbL (see
>> https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/).
>>
>> Simon
>> Am 13.08.2019 um 08:24 schrieb JS:
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> The city of Houston has published several open data sets at
>> data.houstontx.gov and cohgis-mycity.opendata.arcgis.com/. While the
>data
>> sets and open data websites do not contain any licensing-related
>text,
>> there's a general open data policy at
>> http://www.houstontx.gov/adminpolicies/8-7.html.
>>
>> Am I right to assume that this policy, in particular the definition
>of
>> "open data" at No 6, is sufficiently clear so as to use the data
>without
>> further permission?
>>
>> Thanks for your opinions!
>>
>> Best,
>> Jan
>> --
>> Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail gesendet.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> legal-talk mailing
>listlegal-talk at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> legal-talk mailing list
>> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>>
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL:
><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20190813/fd1859ca/attachment-0001.html>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2019 16:30:06 -0700
>From: Kathleen Lu <kathleen.lu at mapbox.com>
>To: "Licensing and other legal discussions."
>	<legal-talk at openstreetmap.org>
>Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] Houston, TX, open data policy license
>	compliance
>Message-ID:
>	<CAFekdnDJSPCHbbtUYky6ru3WTZn7qd7cw0Eoi53pttZcicrLJw at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>Ah, apologies, Jan, I was too hasty in my assessment. If you click on
>the
>CC-BY link, you will see that only the "School District" dataset is
>CC-BY.
>If you do inquire, I would first ask if the dataset you are interested
>in
>is in the public domain, as that is possible under US law, and would be
>most fitting for the description of open data in
>http://www.houstontx.gov/adminpolicies/8-7.html as "freely used, shared
>and
>built-on by anyone, anywhere, for any purpose."
>And to Simon's point about third-party rights, while there are no
>guarantees, the policy does mention "Exempt Data" as including data to
>which there are contractual limitations, so it appears that the city at
>least made some effort to exclude third-party data from open data.
>-Kathleen
>
>On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 2:42 PM Kathleen Lu <kathleen.lu at mapbox.com>
>wrote:
>
>> Hi Jan,
>> Specifically, here's is an example of the Geographic Boundaries page
>that
>> indicates a CC-BY license:
>> http://data.houstontx.gov/group/geographic-boundaries
>> On the left side, at the bottom of the list of information. I would
>> surmise that this applies to all the geographic boundary datasets,
>but you
>> can ask them for clarification.
>> Best,
>> Kathleen
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 13, 2019 at 4:43 AM Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:
>>
>>> While the policy is undoutably good, it does not follow that all
>data
>>> published actually conforms to it (for example third party rights in
>>> existing data could be an issue).
>>>
>>> In any case on data.houstontx.gov the licence is specified for 7
>>> datasets, so I assume the intent is to do that for all over time
>(you
>>> should ask).
>>>
>>> The related problem is that you will need to obtain a waiver for CC
>BY
>>> material as CC BY is in many ways more restrictive than the ODbL
>(see
>>> https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/).
>>>
>>> Simon
>>> Am 13.08.2019 um 08:24 schrieb JS:
>>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> The city of Houston has published several open data sets at
>>> data.houstontx.gov and cohgis-mycity.opendata.arcgis.com/. While the
>>> data sets and open data websites do not contain any
>licensing-related text,
>>> there's a general open data policy at
>>> http://www.houstontx.gov/adminpolicies/8-7.html.
>>>
>>> Am I right to assume that this policy, in particular the definition
>of
>>> "open data" at No 6, is sufficiently clear so as to use the data
>without
>>> further permission?
>>>
>>> Thanks for your opinions!
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Jan
>>> --
>>> Diese Nachricht wurde von meinem Android-Gerät mit K-9 Mail
>gesendet.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> legal-talk mailing
>listlegal-talk at openstreetmap.orghttps://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> legal-talk mailing list
>>> legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>>> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>>>
>>
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL:
><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20190813/955b75bf/attachment-0001.html>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 02:10:41 -0700
>From: Michael Patrick <geodesy99 at gmail.com>
>To: legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>Subject: Re: [OSM-legal-talk] legal-talk Digest, Vol 144, Issue 7
>Message-ID:
>	<CAC54+E6y7t6-er_6qSzH-Fw4zE_baxeYHJbqOGB23HcM4YLSNg at mail.gmail.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>> > Am I right to assume that this policy, in particular the definition
>of
>> "open data" at No 6, is sufficiently clear so as to use the data
>without
>> further permission?
>>
>>  No, it's not. It is a 'policy', not a license. The site says " City
>of
>Houston GIS(COHGIS) data is prepared and made available for general
>reference purposes only", and you (OSM) would be re-publishing and
>redistributing. Sometimes, GIS-ish data is supplied to cities by
>vendors
>with specific terms of use and redistribution, and those vendors are
>allowed to sell the data to anyone else ( cost reduction strategy ).
>
>>From two Open Data Portals:
>
>*City of Seattle* has a notice in the dataset metadata:Terms of Use -*
>Access constraints: *GISUSER_RO Account Access, Public access.*Use
>constraints: *Reproduction/distribution of GIS data for commercial
>purposes
>is prohibited, unless expressly authorized through a separate licensing
>agreement with The City of Seattle. Public use.
>*King County*: King County data are made available with the
>understanding
>that they shall be used exclusively by the obtainer or his/her
>authorized
>agents. Digital products may not be reproduced or redistributed in any
>form
>or by any means without the express written authorization of King
>County.
>( both of these jurisdictions readily granted OSM's request, BTW )
>
>Always ask.
>-------------- next part --------------
>An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>URL:
><http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/legal-talk/attachments/20190814/4c1f5e52/attachment.html>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Subject: Digest Footer
>
>_______________________________________________
>legal-talk mailing list
>legal-talk at openstreetmap.org
>https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>End of legal-talk Digest, Vol 144, Issue 8
>******************************************



More information about the legal-talk mailing list