[OSM-talk] Community Data License Agreement – Permissive and ODbL?

[Simon Poole]

Hi Maurizio

If the context is actually using data from whosonfirst, I don't believe
that this is actually a sensible question. Any data source used by wof
that actually has a licence that is suitable for use in OSM could be
used directly without the added complication of the linux foundations
licence. Historically wof has suffered from similar issues as
"Open"Addresses, I believe however that they put a significant effort
into cleaning things up a bit before the demise of Mapzen, but I
wouldn't be surprised if they still had CC BY sources, which as we all
know are not suitable for use in OSM .

Outside of that, no, the LWG has not made a determination if at all or
with what caveats CDLA licensed data could be included in OSM.

Simon

PS: long diatribe on why on earth the linux foundation is supporting an
OSM competitor not included.


Am 22.08.2018 um 15:27 schrieb Maurizio Napolitano:
> Today I became aware of this open data license created by the Linux Foundation
> https://cdla.io/permissive-1-0/
>
> In my point of view this license appears very pragmatic.
> I read the license text, the FAQs and this nice blog post of the
> project Who's On First
> https://whosonfirst.org/blog/2018/08/21/license-change/
>
> I need to understand if, a dataset under this license, can be imported
> in OpenStreetMap without asking more permissions to the data provider.
> The section 3 is dedicated to the "Conditions on Rights Granted"
> There is a restriction dedicated to the rules for the attribution, but
> it appears very light.
>
> What do you think?
>
> In any case, the CLDA Permisive sounds me more efficienty as the cc-by.
>


-------------- 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/attachments/20180822/94847fcb/attachment.sig>