[OSM-Science] Openstreetmap background in scientific paper

[Benoit Fournier]

Hi Alessandro,

I don't have any direct experience and of course I-am-not-a-lawyer.

You could also ask at:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/legal-talk
legal-questions at osmfoundation.org
and some reference pages (just in case someone needs it)
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Licence_and_Legal_FAQ
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode
https://creativecommons.org/share-your-work/licensing-considerations/compatible-licenses

In case it helps... my suggestion/understanding would be:

Do not take one map with OSM background for a database.
When you make something out of OSM data, manipulating OSM database:
ODbL applies, all with the concepts like database license, Derivative
Database, Collective Database, Produced Work.
When you make something out of a different material (eg. the tiles for
your map background), the license of the material applies, not OSM
license. ODbL and all related concepts like Produced Work does not
apply. In case of CC BY-SA, one relevant notion is Adapted Material.

What really matters is the license of the background, the tiles you
used for your map. Either:
1- You took tiles produced by someone else from OSM data. Tiles are
Produced work, which can be licensed under any license that the
producer like.
2- You produced the background yourself from OSM data. Your tiles are
Produced work, which can be licensed under any license that you like.
3- You took OSM 'standard' tiles: this is licensed as CC BY-SA.

If 1) it depends! Choose a tile producer with a license that suits you.

If 2) you choose the license, no problem.

If 3) background is CC BY-SA...
IMO SA clause applies only for things you actually derive from CC BY-SA material
3.a. Your map is Adapted Material, hence with a BY-SA Compatible
License. Anyone that modify/adapt your map would also deal with BY-SA
material.
3.b. Your paper is not Adapted Material (it is your work, original
material). It can be licensed as you like, CC BY if you wish.

I would go with:
- the paper under CC BY (attribution to author of paper), [no
requirement to go under SA]
- contains:
- - a figure/map under BY-SA Compatible License (source/attribution to
author of figure/map if required),
- - derived from:
- - - unknown data under unknown license (source/attribution if required)
- - - background under CC BY-SA (attribution to OpenStreetMap contributors)

Best regards,

Ben


On 24 January 2018 at 15:14, Alessandro Sarretta
<alessandro.sarretta at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
> I hope this my first question is pertinent to this new OSM list...
> We have recently submitted a scientific paper to an open access journal. One
> figure has an OpenStreetMap background, correctly attributed.
> One reviewer has argued that that figure can't be included in the paper
> because OpenStreetMap derived products should be released under a CC-BY-SA
> licence, while the paper will be released with a CC-BY licence.
> My point is to consider a figure with OSM background as a Produced work
> (https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Community_Guidelines/Produced_Work_-_Guideline)
> and so not bounded to the SA condition.
> What are your experiences and suggestions with this (or similar) issue?
> Thank you for any hint,
>
> Ale
>
> --
> Alessandro Sarretta
>
> e-mail: alessandro.sarretta at gmail.com
> skype: alesarrett
> Web: http://ilsarrett.wordpress.com
> Twitter: https://twitter.com/alesarrett
> Google scholar: http://scholar.google.it/citations?hl=it&user=IsyXargAAAAJ
> ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1475-8686
> ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alessandro_Sarretta/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Science mailing list
> Science at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/science
>