[OSM-legal-talk] Chart in OSM wiki to help with common licensing of image uploads

[Mateusz Konieczny]

note: out of order quotes

Feb 19, 2022, 20:27 by simon at poole.ch:


> - pictograms: I consider it rather problematic to try and determine threshold of originality yourself (the text from WMF noted), I would consider it to be wise to take a conservative approach here.
>
I agree, I added a note with warning and asking to limit to obvious cases.


> - in the case of of aerial imagery licensed on non-open terms (Bing, Esri, Maxar, Mapbox and so on), we really only have permission to use it for editing purposes. I would argue that that should cover use for editing documentation purposes, but it needs to be clear that there are limits to how we can reuse such content,
>
I was worried about touching this, as no matter how I read 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bing_Maps#Terms.2C_Clarifications
I do not see how it can be constructed to allow use on OSM Wiki
"imited solely to aerial imagery use in a non-commercial online editor 
application of OpenStreetMap"

And if it can be argued to be allowed as fair use - is it OK to upload also Google Maps
aerial/maps/street view etc?

> - the section on screenshots would seem to be postulating rights by the app authors in the images that don't actually exist (a screenshot of JOSM is not licensed on GPL terms IMHO),
>
Then how JOSM screenshot is licensed?

The good part of that is that fixing this requires just changing one or two 
template pages and I expect that we would not need to delete files over this,
so there is no need to review them.

Wikimedia Commons usually has an useful docs but 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Screenshots
is not actually explaining anything on that.

> This would seem to be quite an ambitious undertaking.
>
> For now just a couple of remarks
>
Thanks for them!

> - the document should point out that as a rule content on the wiki needs to licenced on open terms and only in exceptional circumstances is it acceptable to upload non-open content,
>
I agree, but... 

Actually right now we have no rule like that on OSM Wiki!
Even "no copyright violations" is mostly not enforced.

Part of the problems is caused by

- people uploading images to wiki without stating source
- people uploading sometimes random images from Internet
- people assuming that all content on wiki is actually CC-BY-SA 2.0
  and using photos that were uploaded under that license

There is backlog of about 20 000 files not specifying source or license,
some of them are blatant copyright violations.

See 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Wiki#Designing_policy_for_handling_files_without_clear_license
(comments are highly welcomed there)
and
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Mateusz_Konieczny/notify_uploaders
for an attempt to solve this.

If someone is willing to help then for example
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Wiki#Dubious_licensing_of_a_derivative_work
lists cases where uploaders were contacted and modified licenses to
very dubious ones so need to be contacted again or images should be 
flagged for deletion.

(I am going through responses of various people but it will take time - 
and once this will be mostly processed I will contact next
group of people who uploaded images without stating license or source)

(and this presented draft was created as part of exactly this cleanup process)


> Simon
>
> Am 19.02.2022 um 15:40 schrieb Chris (Chris2map):
>
>> Hey there,
>>
>> I want to communicate the creation of a chart in OSM wiki with the intention to give wiki users an overview and easy guideline what to do when uploading image files regarding an applicable license.
>>
>> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Drafts/Media_file_license_chart
>>
>> Sparked by the efforts of Mateusz Konieczny to make advance with the many files without any information provided, I created a draft with the most common image types and the possible / desirable licenses, as far as I know it, also with contributions by Mateusz.
>>
>> As of now I think it is reasonably applicable and useful. So you might want to have a look at it.
>> I do appreciate each check of it.
>>
>> IMHO it shouldn't become bigger and more complex than it is already.
>>
>> I plan to move the chart from draft to main namespace and link it on the relevant help pages at about March 1st.
>>
>> Kind regards,
>> Chris
>> (Chris2map)
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20220221/8ffb7f0e/attachment.htm>