Licensing Working Group/Minutes/2023-04-03
OpenStreetMap Foundation, Licensing Working Group (LWG) - Agenda & Minutes
3 April 2023, 18:00 UTC
Minutes approved on 2023-05-15.
- Dermot McNally
- Kathleen Lu (Chairing)
- Jim Vidano
- Tom Lee
- Guillaume Rischard (OSMF board)
Minutes by Dorothea Kazazi
- Simon Hughes
- Tom Hummel
Adoption of past minutes
- 2023-03-06 Approved
Previous action items
- 2017-03-02 Simon Poole to determine existing obligations towards sources listed on the copyright page.
- 2017-05-04 All/Simon Poole to review import guidelines with regards to licence “approval”.
- 2018-03-08 All to look at the Working Groups collecting personal information.
- 2018-04-12 LWG to follow-up on the iD editor, as the number of changesets is now included on the changeset comments thread.
- 2019-01-10 Simon Poole to draft text to developers of apps related to geo/mapping, having OSM in their names or using variations of our logo.
- 2019-02-14 Simon Poole to summarise the advice regarding information requests from law enforcement and send it around.
- 2019-12-12 Simon Poole to discuss trademark registration strategy (more countries, additional classes, etc) with lawdit
- 2020-01-09 Simon Poole to include text about downstream produced works to the FAQ.
- 2020-03-12 Simon Poole to send to Mateusz the link with the research by Kathleen Lu on attribution on various apps.
- 2020-09-10 Simon Poole to set-up call with Kathleen Lu and our UK lawyer about trademarks.
- 2020-10-08 Simon Poole and Guillaume Rischard to look at the translation issue of the copyright policy page.
- 2020-10-08 Simon Poole to send a summary of which action items need to be done.
- 2021-01-14 Guillaume Rischard to report on Board status re identification of outside counsel
- 2021-02-11 Kathleen Lu to check LWG-specific membership requirements on the OSMF website and Conflict of Interest policy and provide to Dorothea any updates for the website.
- 2021-03-11 Guillaume Rischard to sort out various email issues -
Making sure Dermot McNally is on the main legal mailing issue, making sure everyone is getting OTRS email notifications for the legal queue.
- 2021-07-08 Guillaume Rischard to meet with Dermot McNally about using OTRS.
- 2021-07-08 LWG members to provide comment on the HOT draft trademark agreement on the next meeting.
- 2021-07-08 Jim Vidano to look at next steps for Opensnowmap.org paperwork after the trademark request has been approved by the board.
- 2021-07-08 Dermot McNally to ask Tobias for expected outcome regarding the request for change of the text of the standard tile license.
- 2021-08-12 Tom Hummel to suggest text to be published regarding OSMF's legitimate interest in processing personal data.
- 2021-08-12 Dermot McNally to reply to Tobias about simplifying the text of the tile licence.
- 2021-08-12 Dermot McNally to make the pull request on GitHub openstreemap-website regarding attribution requirements for OSMF tiles
- 2021-08-12 Dermot McNally to communicate back to contacts regarding Australian data attribution and suggest filling the waiver template.
- 2021-08-12 LWG to identify OSMF legal texts that might be needed under German law to be in German.
- 2021-09-09 Jim Vidano to ask Simon Poole whether he has previous emails contacting companies that were not displaying attribution.
- 2021-09-09 Guillaume Rischard to check past emails (e.g. last year ones related to case in Germany where they settled in court) for any sent to companies not complying with attribution requirements and to send what he finds, including links to the GitHub repositories with the lists of not complying organisations, to the Signal group.
- 2021-09-09 Jim Vidano and Dermot McNally (2021-12-09) to create a draft template email for the community to contact organisations regarding non compliance with the attribution guidelines
- 2021-09-09 Dermot McNally to reply to Jean-Marc Liotier (board of directors) with the LWG decision to create a template email for minor cases of non-compliance with the attribution guidelines available to the community and the LWG to directly contact bigger companies.
- 2022-01-13 Simon Hughes to download a copy of the Copyright FAQ page and mark anything that is not matching the attribution guidelines or is confusing and circulate that to the LWG.
- 2022-04-14 Guillaume Rischard to ask Tom Hughes to see how many translations of the Copyright and Copyright FAQ page are live. Topic Needed: Update to Copyright FAQ page to match new attribution guidelines
- 2022-04-14 Guillaume Rischard to update agenda with Navionics (Garmin) success. Topic Fixing attribution success
- 2022-06-09 Guillaume Rischard to check with Amanda regarding the return-to address she used to the letter about printed maps with false copyright
- 2022-06-09 Guillaume Rischard to check with the rest of the board about the advice on CWG with LWG to rework the copyright page.
- 2022-09-15 Dermot McNally to send an email to the companies mentioned on Ticket#2022011910000082 and Ticket#202201261000014
- 2022-09-15 Guillaume Rischard to respond to the email Ticket#202208041000024 and redirect to the right person.
- 2022-10-13 Guillaume Rischard to take the Ticket#2022100310000013 issue to the board (related to legal consequences for “unlicensed surveying”)
2022-10-13 Tom Hummel to point to the Corporate Membership page or the donation page. Ticket#2022101110000098
- 2022-11-10 Guillaume Rischard to ask someone else on the Philippines community regarding proof of the use of OSMF trademarks there.
- 2022-11-10 Guillaume Rischard to pass the message to the board member who wrote to the LWG about Open Database License (ODbL).
2023-03-06 Tom Hummel to reply to Impresa Italia. 2023-03-06 Simon Hughes to forward the trademark notice via email to the LWG.
- 2023-03-06 LWG to update GitHub ticket https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/3846
- 2023-03-06 Kathleen Lu to write back to Iiro Laiho (Inquiry re Finnish satellite imagery) and have them clarify that the attribution is ok. The LWG to update the attribution.
2023-03-06 Kathleen Lu to reply to Ticket#2023021010000013 (talk-au Adoption of OSM geometry as state mapping base) 2023-03-06 Kathleen Lu to reply to Ticket#2023011110000041 (Attribution approach to smartphone case product) and say that the attribution can be on the wrapper of the phone. 2023-03-06 Kathleen Lu to reply to Ticket#2023021710000171 (Question about providing imagery waiver) and point to the Editor Layer Index (ELI).
Reportage and action item updates
|The Microsoft MapBuilder was presented to the OSMF board and to Advisory Board members during November 2021: Microsoft presentation - "MapBuilder, an experiment to build the best map" during an Advisory Board meeting. Its initial implementation allowed some Microsoft users to submit changes to the OSM data via a single account, instead of having one account per individual contributor. This led to the single Map builder user OSM account getting a block by the Data Working Group (DWG) on February 2022.
The Data Working Group (DWG), after a request by the board, sent a list of requirements for contributions to OSM via external services - such as the Microsoft MapBuilder - for the contributor to be a meaningful part of the community, including:
There has been communication between Microsoft, individual board members and the DWG, and at least two online meetings in 2022 with some members of the OSMF board: on 2022-03-03 and on 2022-06-20. The current implementation of MapBuilder does not use a single account for all of the edits submitted to OSM, but there are other concerns by the DWG, the board and some community members. The latest meeting between Microsoft, DWG and board members seems to have taken place in January 2022.
Related LWG discussion:
Related board discussions:
The LWG was cc'ed in communication between Mikel Maron (OSMF board) and the MapBuilder team, asking for further details.
- Single sign-on is not an LWG issue.
- The licencing question depends on the type of data and what they intend (e.g. imagery tracing).
No replies yet.
Any updates on reported attribution cases?
Reports in OTRS:
- Ticket#2021081210000057 printed maps with false copyright
- Ticket#2022011910000082 interparcel.com: Dermot Emailed them on 10th Nov, no reply
- Ticket#2022012610000149 https://poster.printmijnstad.nl/editor/city
- complaint that Aberdeen city council may not be attributing correctly – https://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/news/consultation-starts-street-improvements-ashgrove-road
- Note that Aberdeen credits Ordnance Survey, so possible OS is using OSM as one of many sources and the full attribution is not getting carried through
- Ticket#2022032710000125 - https://www.evri.com/find-a-parcelshop
- Hermes UK changed name to evri. So this is an old issue.
- Ticket#2022062610000078 -
- Härryda, Sweden, uses Open Street Map for an app they developed. Inside the app there are no license references to OSM.
- You can see the app on the Google Apps store here: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=se.harryda.medborgar.app&gl=US
- Ticket#2021120810000146 mondialrelay.fr not attributing correctly
Trademarks – any updates?
1. Guillaume - HOT trademark agreement update.
2. Guillaume - Evidence of use in Philippines status.
3. Simon - Any new notices.
They have no Executive Director yet, who can talk to OSMF.
- Guillaume Rischard (OSMF board) has asked Arnalie Vicario (OSMF board) but has not heard back.
- No evidence received from the community.
- Need just some screenshot of mark used in the Philippines. E.g. local website.
This item might be no longer relevant as the deadline probably has passed.
How to pass tickets to the Operations Working Group (OWG), or does OWG have a template answer?
|Background by LWG|
|Example ticket content: "I would like to use OSM maps for a new non-commercial science project in Poland (Europe). Are there legal restrictions on using map zoom? We are currently using maps at site https://meteo.imgw.pl/dyn/ and cannot zoom to level 1 lower. Could you explain me what zoom level can we use?"
"I am developing a web app for independent couriers, and using OSM/Leaflet routing engine to display directions with multiple waypoints. I am using OSM because I believe in your mission, and the philosophy of open source in general, but I also want to be respectful of API bandwidth.I am currently in development and have no paying customers, but so I can plan, at what user volume/threshold should I consider deploying OSM on my own server?"
Does OWG has a template to give to LWG to answer questions like the above?
- OWG is not in OTRS so LWG cannot pass tickets to their queue.
- OWG uses GitHub tickets mostly for public messages.
- OTRS is used for emails that can contain private information. (OTRS is an issue/ticket tracker used by several Working Groups of the OpenStreetMap Foundation.)
- Contact Paul Norman or Tom Hughes.
- Create an OTRS group for one of the OWG members.
- Look at creating an LWG group on GitHub. Then OWG can tag the whole LWG or LWG members on GitHub tickets.
Action item: Guillaume Rischard to ask Grant Slater (Senior Site Reliability Engineer).
We get a lot of complaints about missing attribution. How do we want to deal with those?
- Does not have the bandwidth to deal with all the incoming cases regarding missing attribution.
- Has sent some emails regarding cases of missing attribution, based on a template email which they created and was inspired by similar letters sent by the OSM Belgium community.
- Hiring: hire someone to send emails to people who are missing attributions.
- Would need to provide very detailed instructions, otherwise it will go wrong and might generate bad press.
- Community-led process: Publishing the official template letter for cases of missing attribution ("love letter"), put it on the website, would help.
- Give signal to the community that the LWG takes this seriously, e.g. ask for translations of template emails regarding missing attribution ("love letters").
- On process: Establish one and require people to have sent an "LWG love letter" first, regarding attribution failures.
- On content of template LWG email: Find wording that makes it clear to the recipients of the letters that the letters come from mappers.
Other points mentioned during discussion
- email@example.com is not the right place for the complaints about missing attribution.
- A lot of community care about attribution and it also has the potential to annoy a lot of data users.
- If the board wants OSMF to be involved with this, they should set-up a process and put resources behind it: screen requests to send letters regarding missing attribution, send them and get them translated.
- Freelancing can still occur.
- Some Mapbox customers get unpleasant emails from people speaking allegedly on behalf of OSM.
Action item: Dermot to find wording that makes it clear to the recipients of the "love letters" (emails about cases of missing attribution) that the letters come from mappers.
Queries to legal-questions
Case of German Federal Mapping Agency buried attribution
- German Federal Mapping Agency uses OSM data in one of their projects but has attribution under many link layers, more than Apple.
- Other sources that they may be using are less buried than ours.
- FOSSGIS legal people have a different interpretation of the Open Database License (ODbL).
Action item: Guillaume to send them the Attribution Guidelines.
Ticket#2023021610000155 - City of Helsinki web portal
|Background by LWG|
|To whom it may concern,
The City of Helsinki is developing a public web portal for individuals, companies and organizations to help estimate possible harm caused to other infrastructure users. Harm could be caused, when a construction project causes some interference with currently functioning infrastructure (e.g. bike routes) and services (e.g. tram or bus lines).
Portal implementation is published as open source. Implementation and related data are described in the Appendix.
We would be very pleased if you could help us by commenting on our specific questions on your behalf. Please also see the Appendix to clarify the purpose of our service, and our intended usage of OSM data.
Haitaton web portal and relevant processing methods are described. Please comment the correctness of our interpretation about OSM licence at “Conclusion and our interpretation” -section.
Haitaton service is a property of City of Helsinki.
Description of “Haitaton” web service portal
“Harm” here could be possible temporary effect on bus lines, required alternative traffic route caused by the construction, or a need to reroute cycling routes, just to give a few examples
Reference GIS materials
Reference materials are saved into service backend.
Project effective area
Effective project area is saved into service backend.
Predefined thresholds and rankings are computed and prepared by domain experts beforehand.
Severity of harm is computed by compating GIS analysis results to previously computed rankings and/or thresholds.
Result from harm computation is compared to thresholds, and resulting harm estimate is further used in Haitaton service.
Details of material preparation for reference material purpose
Buffered OSM geometries represent only one part of the reference material.
Conclusion and our interpretation
As we understand, our responsibilities (regarding OSM license) is extended to polygons (generated from OSM lines via buffering operation). We are already currently providing the method to compute these polygons from OSM material.
Interpretation, OSM data
Buffering operation is already now shared in public repository.
GitHub repository to produce buffered polygons is: https://github.com/City-of- Helsinki/haitaton-backend OSM data detailed processing is triggered in (dev branch as of 6.2.2023): haitaton-backend/scripts/gis-material-update/fetch/fetch_data.sh and haitaton-backend/scripts/gis-material-update/process/process_data.sh We interpret, that our responsibility regarding share-alike requirement is fulfilled by providing instructions and methods to reproduce same geometries that Haitaton service does.
Interpretation, other materials
- Using OSM in background to calculate the likelihood for people doing constructions.
- They seem keen to point out the open source nature of their tools.
- Creating polygons of OSM material and they use these polygons in their back-end database: probably trivial transformation. For machine-transformations that are systematic, you can provide the method, and they already do that.
- They're doing enough to satisfy the spirit of the letter of what the licence requires.
Ticket#2023030810000178 - Serbian Geodata
|Background by LWG|
|Hi LWG, I am Branko from OSM Serbia community and in CC is Slobodan from UNDP, one of the people influential in bringing open data laws in Serbia.
Our country's government created platform and released some open data couple of years ago, that we were already using and importing, like administrative boundaries and GTFS data. From December 2022, complete address registry of Serbia became open. We wanted to announce intention to import this, but we figured out that we should first add reference to Serbian Geodetic Authority and the National Open Data Portal to https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright, as this data is under public domain license and we are required to cite the source of open data in accordance with the Serbian Open License (Law on eGovernment, Article 26).
I tried to create change for it, but Tom Hughes mentioned there that we first need to check with LWG about this, hence this mail.
If this is wrong contact, please let us know whom we should contact better?
Also, if we can help resolve this matter in any way and/or provide any artifacts to help you, please let us know.
|Information copied from website and shared during the meeting.
Data License - Serbian Open Data Portal
(2) Data sets published at the portal by public bodies, unless stipulated otherwise, shall be available for re-use as open public data in machine readable form. The data provided may be re-used by any legal or natural person, for commercial and non-commercial purposes, which include, without limitation, possibility that data be copied, distributed, made available to third parties, adapted and merged with other data, integrated in business processes, products and services, altered, as well as re-used for any other purpose different from the purpose for which data were initially collected and processed in the course of public body work.
(3) Right of re-use granted by this License is non-exclusive, is not limited by time or territory and covers the content and the structure of the published datasets, as well as related metadata.
(4) Data covered by the License are published in their original form, with no guarantees with respect to their accuracy and suitability for any particular purpose, unless otherwise is particularly specified.
(5) Data covered by the License are available for utilization and re-use without charge.
(6) By utilizing the data the user undertakes to ensure that upon each re-use, in the appropriate form, he/she refers to the source of data (including the name of the public body that has made the data available via this portal), states the download/take over date, states the address where
- Members of the OSM Serbia community made their own judgement that the Serbian governmental Geodata is ok and they want to add a reference to the Serbian governmental data.
- The LWG has to look at the licence.
On licence of the Serbian governmental Geodata
- Open Licence in French https://github.com/etalab/licence-ouverte/blob/master/LO.md#licence-ouverte-20open-licence-20, designed for ODbL compatibility
- Terms page has english text provided by the Serbian government.
- Each dataset can have its own licence.
On checking if there are pass through attribution requirements
- Ask them to point us to the original text.
- Do machine translation.
- If the text is fuzzy, find someone who is versed in the actual legal text.
Suggestion Ask the Local Chapter in Kosovo to help.
Other points mentioned during discussion
- No guarantee that the licence that an administrative body puts up under open data release has to do with the statutory authority that made them release the data in the first place.
- Concern how to deal with future requests of licences in languages that are not easily understood.
- Dual branded.
Action item: Tom Lee to reply to them on GitHub asking for additional details.
Guillaume Rischard disconnected from 28 to 32 minutes after start.
Tom Lee disconnected 37 minutes after start.
Ticket#2023031810000097 - onwheelsapp
|Background by LWG|
We are a non profit from Belgium working on collecting data about the accessibility for wheelchair users of public buildings.We have had contact with the OSM Belgium community about transferring our existing dataset to OSM and using the right tags and restrictions. There are still some legal questions we haven about privacy of our users:
1. Now people can use our app to view and add new locations for free. To make it easy for everyone we don’t ask people to make an account. We only ask people to fill in their email when they add or edit a new location. Mainly for internal reasons so we are able to contact them when they make the same mistakes, but this info is not open to the public. With our new app we are building we will host all our data in OSM. People will be able to view, edit and add data directly in OSM. The standard in OSM is to also add the contributor (email) to the dataset. But this is something we rather not do, since this private data will be open for everyone. Instead we would like to add a general contributor tag from On Wheels (firstname.lastname@example.org), if someone from the community needs to contact. We would keep the personal info of the user of the app on out back end if this user needs to be contacted. What is possible is that we generate an internal user number to an email address and send this user number as the contributor tag together with our general contact info to OSM. For example; OnWheels:user=203. Is this a solution so we don’t infringe on the OSM restrictions and legal privacy laws?
2. We are working on a text for the data license (users will need to agree with this before using the app) and want to know if this text complies with the legal data license set by OSM?
On Wheels has set the goal to convert its existing database to an open data license. We do this by hosting our data directly in OpenStreetMap. OpenStreetMap (OSM) data is distributed under the Open Database License (ODbL). The Open Database License (ODbL) is a license agreement intended to allow users to freely share, modify, and use this Database while maintaining this same freedom for others. All data collected and modified with the On Wheels app can be used freely by everyone when attributed to OpenStreetMap and On Wheels. Because we want to ensure our users that our data is correct and verified, we ask not to delete and change data collected by us without contacting us first. Please visit our OSM wiki page for more information about the data we collect and the correct descriptions and tagging: (has to be made).The On Wheels app uses map data from OpenStreetMap which is rendered by our own On Wheels design, such as icons, colours and user interface.On Wheels commits to educate and inform its users to ensure the high quality data rules set by OpenStreetMap, and to implement quality control functions in the app before sending the data to OpenStreetMap. On Wheels or its users cannot be held accountable for any mistakes, but On Wheels can be contacted for tips to improve the quality of our data: email@example.com. For more detailed information about copyright rules please visit: www.openstreetmap.org/copyright
onwheelsapp vs Wheelmap
- Seems to provide more information.
- We might get duplication, like we did from Wheelmap for 2 years, if they operate from non-live OSM data.
Wheelmap vs Microsoft MapBuilder
- Wheelmap has been grand-fathered in and only one tag can be changed.
- MS editing is more broad.
- Suggest that their users become OSM contributors, as they might have not considered that.
- Signing for OSM is not trivial - there is a barrier to entry.
- You have to understand the consequences of editing the database.
- They vet all the information before it gets added to OSM and take full responsibility.
- Data might fall under import guidelines or organised editing guidelines.
- Understand that the whole organisation might get blocked.
- No way to ensure that people have not copied from other apps.
Other points mentioned during discussion
- Data imports from organisations/governments have intermediaries and it is acceptable to have an intermediary, as long as they take full responsibility.
- Sometimes there are updates to those imported datasets.
- Many apps allow their users to log-in to OSM, so they could do that.
The current onwheelsapp data has been collected using Google, so it cannot be added to OSM so far.
Response draft: Looks like from the website that they use Google to collect previous data, so that data cannot be imported into OSM.
Ticket#2023032410000272 – Asesoría
|Background by LWG|
|Buenas tardes. Solicito su apoyo amablemente para asesoría en contribución de información a la plataforma de OSM. La cual contempla información de tipo vectorial: líneas (nomenclatura de calles oficiales del municipio de Temoaya, Estado de México, México) y polígonos (límite de localidades oficiales del municipio de Temoaya, Estado de México, México, así como el límite oficial del municipio de Temoaya, Estado de México, México). Lo anterior conservando las etiquetas correspondientes a: - nombre de calle (línea), - nombre de localidad (polígono) - superficie (polígono) y, - notas adicionales (en polígonos). Gracias. agradecería bastante su apoyo.
Thank you. I would greatly appreciate your support. Greetings.
It seems that they didn't know how to contribute.
Action item: Dermot to put Benito Romualdo Palma Temoaya in touch with the Mexican community.
2023 LWG meeting dates:
Monday May 15, 1700 UTC
Monday Jun 12, 1700 UTC
Monday Jul 10, 1700 UTC
Monday Aug 14, 1700 UTC
Monday Sep 11, 1700 UTC
Monday Oct 16, 1700 UTC
Monday Nov 13 – back to 1800 UTC
Monday Dec 11, 1800 UTC
Monday Jan 08 2024, 1800 UTC
US daylight savings start - Mar 12 2023
EU daylight savings start - Mar 26 2023
EU daylight savings end - Oct 29 2023
US daylight savings end - Nov 5 2023
Meeting adjourned 56' after the start.