OpenStreetMap Foundation

Licensing Working Group

  Tuesday 20th March 2012

19:00 - 20:30 GMT

Agenda & Minutes

final

Present: Simon Poole, Henk Hoff, Richard Weait, Michael Collinson, Grant Slater, Steve Coast (left 20:45), Dermot McNally

Apologies: Oliver

Minutes by: Michael

1. Adoption of Minutes of last meetings

The LWG last met March 13th for a long-form meeting.

https://docs.google.com/a/osmfoundation.org/document/d/1W7XQC_f1f0bOwcyhAl5HLDzBMYHEULK3Gh1cPeGoUXw/edit

Proposed: Simon

Seconded: Grant

Accepted

2. MATTERS ARISING (open action items from previous meetings)

  • Grant - Get a license and attribution page link as an XML Comment into these APIs: Rails API. (should be complete soon)
  • Mike -  combine Bing Imagery License comments as a succinct list for forwarding to Microsoft legal.
  • Mike - Incorporate into foundation landing page http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Contributor_Terms_Summary
  • Mike - Provide text to Grant re http://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright and friends in Sept 20th minutes. ?OS or linking to attribution page or both?
  • Henk - Japan argath import. Ask if it could go now.?
  • Mike - Make sure responding to German-language decliner mailings on a future agenda so that it gets done.
  • Mike to draft messaging required for consumers of planet diffs related to changeover requirements due to licence change.
  • Mike - update UMP on OSM community feedback. 
  • Dermot will write to rebuild list re Rule test cases. and Simon will translate for German lists.

3. Finalise today's agenda

4. AND

Henk Hoff reports:

Just received an e-mail from AND that we may also publish their donated Dutch, Indian and Chinese data under the ODbL (and only ODbL).

Under the following conditions:
- It only covers the data that has been imported as of March 1st 2012
- Copies of the original initial delivered data set will be destroyed and removed from our servers
- AND will be mentioned on the copyright page.

I think this sounds reasonable.

The main information we haven't imported from the Dutch dataset is the addressing. But, since this year, the national building-registry is open data and contains far better addressing information.

If you (LWG) are also OK, I'll send an official confirmation.

LWG resolves:

LWG accepts the three conditions above and asks Henk Hoff to send an send an official confirmation.

5.  Contact and re-map

Global picture:

  • Older contributor acceptances now 63,160 - an increase of 720 over last week . 421 declines.
  • Nodes that will likely not survive the license change are down from 21.83M to 21.43 [1]
  • Ways which may have to be completely deleted are slightly down from 1.72M to 1.67M [1]
  • Problematic relations down from 39.7K to 39.6K [1]

[1] http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/munin.html 

Lost mappers project (if anything):

Ongoing

6. Technical Rebuild

The Plan

http://www.osmfoundation.org/wiki/License/Rebuild_Plan

Dry runs start this Saturday. Schedule is doable but tight with little room for error.

Poland object-granularity inclusion/exclusion for ODbL

Yes, we think we can support from a software perspective. Dermot to follow up.

Test cases that require input

https://github.com/zerebubuth/openstreetmap-license-change/blob/master/test_needs_clarity.rb (Ruby source file)

1. The need to do sub-changeset (that is, OSM-ID-level) discrimination for Polish data. This relates to the fact that not all UMP contributors are granting rights to retain under ODbL.

2. Edge cases arising out of Matt Amos' test suite. Those tests in his suite whose expected outcome is proving unclear have been separated into one place. The recurring theme is of the form:

Non-agree-er adds a tag, perhaps a very specific one like highway=motorway or name=Main Street. Somebody subsequently deletes this. Time passes. An agree-er adds the same tag just as it was before. On the one hand, we don't know that he just dug it out of the history. We _do_ know that we tell mappers not to (just as we tell them not to copy from Google). We also know that there is no recognisable difference between the bad and good cases and that many "correct" re-mappers will do this without also adding odbl=clean.

The LWG takes the position that good faith is assumed both by continuing and non-continuing mappers unless there is specific evidence to the contrary. For this case, if odbl=clean is present then it should be assumed that an continuing mapper has checked both location and all tags in good faith.  If it is not present, we suggest that a deleted/recreated tag should be considered clean provided that they are done in a different change-set.

7. Hall of Shame

LWG notes that Apple Inc. have published maps based on OpenStreetMap without proper attribution and has been discussed at board level. LWG to approach our legal counsel.

8. AOB

  • How to attribute in an ODbL world. Discussion zeroed in on simply “© OpenStreetMap contributors” or “© OpenStreetMap”. Subject to legal advice we prefer to link this to the project home page.

  • Tiles. CC-BY-SA 2.0 or 3.0? No reason to move from 2.0 at this time.

  • Data consumer communication - particularly diffs V clean break

We favour the clean break for practical reasons and to ensure that data consumers cannot overlook the licence change.

Next Meeting:

Tuesday Mar 27th 18:00 UTC / 19:00 BST(UK) / 20:00 CEST