[talk-au] ACT CC BY waiver

Simon Poole simon at poole.ch
Tue May 30 08:00:31 UTC 2017


Andrew, pls jog my memory, is the ACT data available on CC BY 4.0 terms
or are the terms based on a earlier version?

The problem with point 2 is that, if taken seriously, the relevant terms
impose rather far reaching restrictions on how derived works can be
used, for example a map generated from such data cannot be distributed
on a blu-ray disk, or shown on a DRM protected streaming service (for
example Netflix)*. Now the terms in question are likely the most ignored
language ever in open licensing and even in the discussions on the CC
mailing list leading up to the 4.0 versions you can find statements like
"everybody ignores it", but we are OSM, not your run-of-the-mill data
aggregation project that couldn't care less and we have a certain duty
to ensure our downstream users can actually OSM data on our advertised
terms.

So for now I would suggest not using any more ACT data and going back to
them and asking if having those restrictions in place is really their
intent, and what they intend to achieve with them.

Simon

* interesting enough CC BY 4.0 IMHO expanded the scope of the relevant
terms to not just DRM but any more restrictive terms in a copyleft
fashion (see 5.B), however CC doesn't interpret it that way (which leads
to the question why they added the text in the first place).

Am 30.05.2017 um 07:25 schrieb Andrew Harvey:
> I contacted the ACT Government to see if they could complete the CC BY
> waiver form as provided
> at https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/03/17/use-of-cc-by-data/. We
> have previous correspondence
> at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attribution/Australian_Capital_Territory from
> which the local community I believe has started using ACT Government
> data, but now we have a proper waiver form I wanted to make sure
> everything was in order.
>
> The ACT Government have come back that point (1) in the waiver
> regarding attribution is okay but they can't agree to point (2) in the
> waiver. How important is having the data provider agree to both of
> these points? What does this mean for any data already imported into
> OSM from this source? Will it need to be removed?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-au mailing list
> Talk-au at openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-au

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/attachments/20170530/59ff4bbf/attachment.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/talk-au/attachments/20170530/59ff4bbf/attachment.sig>


More information about the Talk-au mailing list