[talk-au] Help with licensing

[Satuim]

 From Daniel Silk on the Slack chat for Australian mapping:

 >I would just reply and reiterate that they do not need to provide the 
data under a different license, but simply sign a waiver that clarifies 
some minor license differences and grants explicit permission for use.

> Is there a list of government  departments that have signed one of these waivers?

 > I work for LINZ... ours is on the OSM wiki: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/8/83/OSM_waiver_-_LINZ.pdf

>You could also interpret "It is our belief that a CC:BY licence is 
sufficient for use of our data." as permission.


On 19/01/18 15:38, Jonathon Rossi wrote:
> > The Department will not provide the data under an Open Database 
> license. It is our belief that a CC:BY licence is sufficient for use 
> of our data.
>
> Am I missing something, I didn't think we were asking anyone to 
> relicense their data under the ODbL, just to accept our understanding 
> of one clause (Section 3(a)(1)) and waive another (Section 
> 2(a)(5)(B)). Are DNRM misunderstanding what we are requesting?
>
> The second line of the waiver says:
> > [Entity] waives Section 2(a)(5)(B) of the CC BY 4.0 license as to 
> OpenStreetMap and its users with the understanding that the Open 
> Database License 1.0 requires open access or parallel distribution of 
> OpenStreetMap data.
>
> Section 2(a)(5)(B) says:
> > No downstream restrictions. You may not offer or impose any 
> additional or different terms or conditions on, or apply any Effective 
> Technological Measures to, the Licensed Material if doing so restricts 
> exercise of the Licensed Rights by any recipient of the Licensed Material.
>
> Aren't we (OSMF) just asking the copyright owner to waive their rights 
> to this clause to allow downstream users of the collective OSM data so 
> that for example it could be put on a Bluray disc. Their data would 
> still be CCBY licensed, and the OSM data would be a mix of ODbL and 
> CCBY licensed data?
>
> /cc Simon Poole
>
> On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 3:19 PM Jonathon Rossi <jono at jonorossi.com 
> <mailto:jono at jonorossi.com>> wrote:
>
>     I also want to make use of the QLD DCDB and was going to start a
>     new thread on the mailing list about it today to work out how to
>     get out of this stalemate after Andrew Davidson informed me last
>     week.
>
>     It appears Andrew Harvey just recently had great luck with
>     Victoria DELWP signing the waiver and on a corporate letterhead.
>     AndrewH was that luck and are there any insights that you could
>     assist us with here that might help us convince QLD DNRM?
>
>     Jono
>
>     On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 2:42 PM Andrew Davidson
>     <theswavu at gmail.com <mailto:theswavu at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>         It's a known problem with a difference of opinion between the
>         Queensland Government and OSM as to licence compatibility. See
>         this thread for example:
>
>         https://www.mail-archive.com/talk-au@openstreetmap.org/msg10883.html
>
>         On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 3:34 PM, Satuim <95.5.radio at gmail.com
>         <mailto:95.5.radio at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>             Hey everyone,
>
>             I recently asked for permission to use a CC-BY 4.0 dataset
>             but got rejected. The dataset I want to use is fairly
>             important (boundaries for suburbs and counties for QLD).
>
>             Here is the response I got:
>
>                 The Department will not provide the data under an Open
>                 Database license. It is our belief that a CC:BY
>                 licence is sufficient for use of our data.
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Talk-au mailing list
>         Talk-au at openstreetmap.org <mailto: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/20180119/b58e2f3a/attachment.html>