On Sat, Sep 15, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Tim Alder
I had in mind that the OSM default style file is
published under CC0 and not
CC-BY-SA. If this is correct we should this license.
For the OSM-Gadget and WIWOSM it should be a small effort to change the
For three layers we have in OSM-Gadget 3 attributions and limited space,
Parts of the attribution are translated by translate wiki. Our attributions
are in the moment:
"Map by OpenStreetMap (CC-BY-SA), Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA), WIWOSM"
I would change it to
"(c) OpenStreetMap contributors: license, Wikipedia (CC-BY-SA), WIWOSM"
As mention here. Would this be correct?
Unfortunately I can't tell you if that is correct, as I am not a
lawyer, and I also find the documentation somewhat confusing. I was
hoping osmf could put out some specific examples of attribution, but
so far haven't seen any.
But the above wording would correspond to how I would interpret the
legal FAQ. So unless we can get some advise from the wikimedia legal
team, I would suggest to just use that wording and should OSMF
complain be prepared to change it.
With respect to the license of tiles: This has been a somewhat
controversial debate what licenses "produced works" can actually be
under. Particularly can it be under CC-0. My understand would be it
can't as the ODbL requires the produced work to contain a notice that
it is produced from data under the ODbL. So I think, an attribution
license, like CC BY is the minimum the produced work can be under.
I am not sure if the license the style sheet is under plays any role
in what the tiles are licensed at. I think it can be anything, as has
been the case while data and tiles were CC BY-SA.
But I am not a lawyer, so I don't really know.
P.S. Otherwise, it sounds like no objections to re-importing. So as
soon as I can free enough space on the partition, I will begin the new
import. But it will likely be another couple of days (or more) before
it is complete.
To make the right attribution easier, it would be nice if osm.org
the attribution on the map like it want have it on external maps, because
else I believe the ODBL-documentation in the OSM-Wiki is very complex and
Am 15.09.2012 01:36, schrieb Kai Krueger:
as you probably all know OpenStreetMap has been in the process of
changing its license for a while. Well, as of two days ago the process
was finally completed and the source data from OpenStreetMap.org
now licensed under the OBbL 1.0 .
For the moment the data in the osm_mapnik database on the toolserver
is still CC-BY-SA as the replication was suspend at the time of the
license change. However, in order to enable updates again, we have to
transition over to ODbL as well.
For legal reasons, the recommended (by the OSMF) transition strategy
is to drop any existing databases and re-import them fresh from the
newly release planet file now licensed under ODbL. To be able to
enable updates again, I would like to do that fairly soon.
Apart from that, the attribution string needs to be slightly changed
for all projects that are using the OpenStreetMap data, once the
re-import has completed.
With respect to tile licensing, I suggest we follow the example of
osm's tileserver. While the underlying data is licensed ODbL, the
rendered tiles would be licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0
Could everyone who uses the OSM database on toolserver therefore
please check if there are any issues with transitioning to ODbL and
prepare for the change of attribution?
Given that the OpenStreetMap is used in Wikipedia through the
OSM-gadget, WMA and WIWOSM, does the wikimedia legal team have any
suggestions or objections to the change?
I'll keep you posted.
Maps-l mailing list
Maps-l mailing list