Licensing Working Group
Tuesday 9th April 2013
18:00 - 18:50 UTC
Agenda & Minutes
Present: Michael Collinson, Emilie Laffray, Simon Poole, Dermot McNally
Apologies: Oliver Kühn
Minutes by: Michael
1. Adoption of Minutes of last meeting
Note: This editable minute link is for LWG members only. A public version is normally available at http://www.osmfoundation.org
2. MATTERS ARISING (open action items from previous meetings)
3. Finalise today's agenda
4. IGN, French national mapping agency (Emilie)
Are considering using OSM data for verification purposes of administrative boundaries (nothing else for the time being). Background: OSM has collated boundaries separately from the tax authority and resolved some discrepancies between different datasets.
1) Informally we have no objection to use of OSM data solely for verification purposes, provided that we do not not create any loop-hole for copying/derivative databases. I.e. if compare but not take, share alike is not triggered. We will consider some formal wording on this issue Mike - draft wording for discussion. We have discussed this before re UMP in Poland.
2) If IGN want to go the next step and use, (“take”), OSM data and create a derivative, we note that ODbL is already in use in France for government data and strongly encourage IGN to use the same license.
5 Content License for ODbL
* Clause 3: “OSMF agrees that it may only use or sub-license Your Contents as part of a database and only under the terms of one or more of the following licences: ODbL 1.0 for the database and DbCL 1.0 for the individual contents of the database; ...”
6. Trademark and branding IP policy (Simon)
7. DMCA take-down procedure documentation
No action, we are awaiting some input from legal counsel.
8. ODbl-Compatible Licenses
Still no useful answer from OpenDataCommons coordinating group
9. Dynamic Data
Briefly discussed. This is the issue of whether dynamic data, (e.g. how full a car-park is at any time of day), of no formal interest to OSM is used in conjunction with our static data, (e.g. location of car-parks within a city), whether share-alike is triggered on the dynamic data. One interesting concept that came up is “related data”. Dynamic data is not related to mapping data and therefore cleanly outside the share-alike trigger, such as have a clear separation between text and a map in a book. We will put this to legal counsel. For the record, it should be noted that LWG will take no position on this until the OSM community have a chance to discuss it.
Next meeting: Tuesday April 30th at 18:00 GMT/UTC
Note: There is an OSMF Management Team meeting on April 23rd.