[talk-au] ODbL data.gov.au permission granted
laughton.andrew at gmail.com
Tue Nov 15 10:52:07 GMT 2011
> I fail to see a contradiction. If you are not sure about something, you
> ask explicitly and get an explicit answer. That is what we got. That is
> what is written on the wiki with the kind assistance of data.gov.au.
> If it helps, me formally affirm and represent what I have said before: I
> have had a series of correspondance with data.gov.au where: 1) I have
> explictly pointed out we are moving to another license specifically written
> for open data, that it might not jive with CC-BY and so they may not be
> happy with the provisions for downstream attributions, and asked them if
> they could explictly give us permission to continue use or if we should
> remove it; 2) The conclusion being yes, we can "incorporate and publish
> such CC-BY licensed geographic coordinate datasets under a free and open
> license, including the Open Database License, provided that primary
> attribution is made here [
> and that each dataset used is also listed here in the format *Dataset
> Name, Date Published, License, Agency Name, originally retrieved from
> http://data.australia.gov.au"*; 3) For public transparency, the operative
> version of the statement is not in the correspondance but directly drafted
> http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attribution#Australian_government_public_information_datasetsand actively reviewed by
> data.gov.au to their satisfaction.
I might be able to help a little.
The words "... provided that primary attribution is made ..."
Would seem at first glance the exclude any license that does not require
Perhaps you could explain to us what happens if a third party takes OSM
data, and publishes it without any attribution at all.
Would they be in violation of the Open Database License ? If not, the
problem is that you are now distributing government data in violation of
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Talk-au