[Osmf-talk] Google Open Buildings now licensed ODbL

[Martin Machyna]

If we go with CC-BY 4.0 + waiver, would that solve the problem?


As a side note, I don't think it is healthy for us to think about somebody
as a competitor. We are here to create/gather geospatial data and provide
it for free to everybody, not to compete with someone. As far as I know
Google is not a data provider, but rather a provider of map services so if
it is competing with someone it is more Mapbox, Geofabrik,... etc. Google
has decided to help us and recently also started using our data, I think we
should embrace it as a recognition of our hard work and use any help there
is to fulfill our mission.

Martin

On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 7:41 PM Simon Poole <simon at poole.ch> wrote:

>
> Am 17.09.2021 um 17:02 schrieb Mikel Maron:
> > Agreed this shouldn't be used for bulk import. Human reviewed conflation
> and editing signal I think will be useful in some regions.
>
> It seems as if this is now available via RapiD and it is likely going to
> be added come what may.
>
> I know nobody asked for my opinion, but I don't consider it a
> particularly good idea that somebody will need to go back to google and
> ask for their permission to retain the data if OSM ever decides it wants
> to change its licence. While it is true that there have been, and
> continue to be, other cases in which ODbL licensed data has been
> imported (not that I consider that a particularly good idea in those
> cases either), it hasn't been from a de facto competitor that is known
> to change its policies at the drop of a hat.
>
> Simon
>
>
> >
> > * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Friday, September 17, 2021, 09:54:53 AM EDT, <dfjkman at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > As an example as to why it is not a good idea to use this data for a
> bulk import have a look at this link of one small part of Lusaka (
> https://sites.research.google/open-buildings/?lat=-15.390364893412949&lng=28.321204487879392&zoom=17#explore),
> select the hybrid option to see how out it is. This shopping centre is
> several years old.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mikel Maron <mikel.maron at gmail.com>
> > Sent: 17 September 2021 15:20
> > To: osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> > Subject: Re: [Osmf-talk] Google Open Buildings now licensed ODbL
> >
> > As agreed with Google, I've added Google Buildings to the list of
> Contributors,
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#Multiple_African_countries
> >
> > * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thursday, September 16, 2021, 12:29:52 PM EDT, Mikel Maron <
> mikel.maron at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > https://sites.research.google/open-buildings/#faq
> >
> > OSM can now use this data set. Very interesting change to see G support
> OSM directly.
> >
> > Noting the prior discussion on quality issues on this list, expect to
> see this more useful in peri-urban and rural areas. The FAQ notes the
> importance of human review and when possible local knowledge
> >
> > -Mikel
> >
> > * Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > osmf-talk mailing list
> > osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > osmf-talk mailing list
> > osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > osmf-talk mailing list
> > osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> > https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
> _______________________________________________
> osmf-talk mailing list
> osmf-talk at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/osmf-talk/attachments/20211203/a8bf52bf/attachment.htm>