Licensing Working Group/Minutes/2023-05-15

OpenStreetMap Foundation, Licensing Working Group (LWG) - Agenda & Minutes
15 May 2023, 18:00 UTC

Participants

Kathleen Lu (Chairing)
Simon Hughes
Tom Lee
Tom Hummel
Dermot McNally

Absent

Jim Vidano
Guillaume Rischard (OSMF board)

Previous action items

Reportage and action item updates

Bing Mapbuilder – is LWG’s portion complete?

Background

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:

Ability to be contacted through means that OSM offers, e.g. messages on changesets created by the individual.
Being aware of contributing to OSM.
Consenting to our licence terms.
Being able to be moderated/blocked - vandalism shouldn't be able to slip under the radar through a common account.
Being able to delete all contributions by a particular user.

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:

2023-04 Bing MapBuilder
2023-03 Bing MapBuilder
2023-02 Licensing_Working_Group/Minutes/2023-02-13#Board_business_-_Bing MapBuilderComplaint_regarding_Bing_MapBuilder|Board business - Complaint regarding Bing MapBuilder]]

Related board discussions:

2023-01 Any other business: Microsoft's MapBuilder (mid-month board chat, not open to observers)
2022-06 Reportage: MapBuilder implementation proposal
2022-03 Contributions without individual OSM accounts Public board meeting, mid-month board chat, not open to observers
2022-02 Contributions without individual OSM accounts Public board meeting, board chat, not open to observers
2022-01 Contributions without individual OSM accounts
2021-11-12 Editing without an OSM account (mid-month board chat, not open to observers)
2021-11-02 Microsoft presentation - MapBuilder, an experiment to build the best map (during an Advisory Board meeting)

Request by Mapbuilder for meeting with LWG to discuss Sarah Hoffman’s questions.
These are not LWG questions but LWG can attend to assist.
Board will need to move this along.

onwheelsapp - Ticket#2023031810000097

Background by LWG

Hi,

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 (info@onwheelsapp.com), 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: info@onwheelsapp.com. For more detailed information about copyright rules please visit: www.openstreetmap.org/copyright

Previous LWG discussion: 2023-04

Kathleen wrote back to them.
They are using Google Maps currently, so possibly some of their data is not importable. To be determined.
They seem to want to organise supervised mapathons (similar to YouthMappers), where they provide instructions how to map and there is a supervisor to help.
Kathleen suggested they set up an Organized Editing page as a central contact point regarding their users’ edits.

Serbian data import - Ticket#2023030810000178

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[1][2] and GTFS data[3]. 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[4] and the National Open Data Portal[5] 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[6], 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.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Serbia/RGZ_Import
[2] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2020-January/006149.html
[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Public_transport_in_Serbia
[4] https://geosrbija.rs
[5] https://data.gov.rs
[6] https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/3959

Information copied from website and shared during the meeting.

Data License - Serbian Open Data Portal
(1) Any use of data published at this portal will be permitted provided it fulfils the requirements of this license (hereinafter: the License) that is drafted in conformance with the Article 26 of the Law on Electronic Governance (Official Gazette of the RoS, no. 27/2018) and the relevant bylaw. By utilizing the data provided under the License the user indicates his/her acceptance of all the terms and conditions of the License as specified below.

(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 data can be downloaded/taken over, as well as provides clear indication on any eventual changes, editing or new design of the data that are used.

Previous LWG discussion: 2023-04

Tom Lee to update - https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/3959

We got some more context, but it has not provided sufficient clarity.
The original intent of the stature seems not to require viral attribution, but the way it has been implemented in the page's licence notices releasing the data make it seems that there is a pass through attribution requirement.
Language which suggests pass through requirement: "upon each reuse".

On potential interpretations:

Paragraph 1: applies to the user.
Paragraph 2: applies to everyone, including all downstream users of OSM.
Paragraph 6: only applies to the person who downloaded from the portal.
- Serbian authorities might think that OSM is the user.
- Even if OSM is the user of the data, the information does not have to be on the front of the data, just link to it, which can be done from the import page, which will be accessible.

Other points mentioned:

There is a potential mismatch between the expectations of the publisher and OSM requirements.
There seems to be no obligation to downstream users.

Suggestions:

Find an authority that would respond to a letter asking for clarifications.
Add to the import page: date of the download, link to the dataset, etc.
Refer to the changesets, regarding
If "upon each reuse" is scoped to the user (each reuse performed by the user), explaining what is happening with edits is a bit tricky, but we can refer to the changesets.

Action item: Tom Lee to add clarity to the website ticket and potentially modify the pull request. Can make a generic statement that "OSM data is continuously edited and please check edit history", linking to the OSM wiki article about changesets.

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
Ticket#2022033010000217
- 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

Love letters

Background

The Belgian OSM community has drafted letters to people who were not attributing OSM. The letters were drafted in a particularly nice and polite tone and were called "Belgian love letters" by members of the Belgian OSM community.

The LWG has agreed to

create English email templates for use by OSM community members to send to companies that do not follow the attribution guidelines and to
directly approach bigger companies.

Previous LWG minutes

2022-10-13 Dermot’s Belgian love letter
2022-09-15 Dermot’s Belgian love letter
2022-08-04 Dermot’s Belgian love letter
2022-07-07 Dermot’s Belgian love letter
2022-06-09 Dermot’s Belgian love letter
2022-05-12 Dermot’s Belgian love letter
2022-03-17 Topic deferred to next meeting
2022-02-17 1) LWG to add comments to the draft template email by Dermot that the community will be able to send to people who have used OSM data without attribution and 2) Dermot to have another look at the draft
2022-01-13 About Belgian OSM love letters
2021-11-11 AOB - Template email (regarding non compliance to attribution)
2021-09-09 LWG role in approaching major data users about better compliance with attribution
2021-08-12 LWG role in approaching major data users about better compliance with attribution requirements requirements

Suggested texts to make it clear that the letters sent to people/organisations not providing proper OSM attribution are written by volunteers:
- "I write as one of over 1 million OpenStreetMap volunteer mappers."
- "I write as a mapper from the OpenStreetMap community, which consists of millions of volunteers who contribute individually to the project."

Dermot to add both texts on the email template, and the person sending the letter can choose.

Suggestions:

Go through the backlog of OTRS LWG tickets regarding missing attribution and suggest to them to use the email template.
Publicise the email template and make the text findable.

Action items:

Dermot to write a template reply and send it to Kathleen.
Kathleen to create an OTRS template with Dermot's template reply.

Trademarks – any updates?

Guillaume - HOT trademark agreement update

Not discussed.

Guillaume - Evidence of use in Philippines status – done?

Not discussed.

Simon - Any new notices

"Open Street" in Japan

We received a trademark notice for the registration of "Open Street" in Japan.

See: 2023-01 Japan - trademark notice for the registration of OpenStreet. The decision was not to oppose.

How to pass tickets to OWG, or does OWG have a template answer?

Not discussed.

Digital Services Act

Not minuted after request.

The LWG discussed and think that OSM is either a micro or a small entity.

Where to forward user deletion requests?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FAQ#How_can_I_close_my_account?

Any way to block address in OTRS? Junk mail levels have become intolerable

Awaiting Guillaume’s report.

Queries to legal-questions

Ticket#2023032410000272 – Asesoría

Dermot to make connection.

Ticket#2023040710000258 – Geo-fencing patents

Mobile phones use geo-fencing, e.g. for triggering actions when you arrive or leave a particular place.
OSMF does not have the infrastructure to maintain a patent portfolio (team/fees/law firm for filings). Would be a lot of work to accept something like this.
Nothing related to geofencing seems related to what we care about.

Suggestion: Refer them to the Linux Foundation (they have a portfolio), FOSSGIS or Mozilla, who could take the patents and have them for the community.

Decision: Dorothea to add the topic to the next board meeting agenda.

Official OSM merchandise

Background

Due to the lack of official OSM merch, I would like to sell some myself. All profits will be going to the OSMF.

… I’m planning to sell them on Etsy and an own website using WordPress + WooCommerce. I don’t have that up yet, though.I’m not sure how many I would sell; products are printed on demand.

I’ve attached a line-up of products I’m planning to sell.

We would need a template licence agreement - which we don't have - if we were to proceed.
It would be nice to have OSM merchandise, subject to the safeguard of the seller not being reputable or reflecting badly on the project.
Would need a board approval.
No exclusivity.
Not that complicated, as offers to donate all profits to OSMF.

Suggestion: Request photos of any additional items.

Decision: Dorothea to add the topic to the next board meeting agenda.

Action items:

Board to discuss the issue.
Simon's trademark person to draft a physical merchandise template. Existing templates on domain names and State of the Map conference can be used.
Kathleen to write to the person who contacted the LWG to tell them that the Board is considering the issue.

Polar Electro

Background

My name is Tomi Lindholm and I'm working as a program manager at Polar Electro - a manufacturer of sports training computers, particularly known for developing the world's first wireless heart rate monitor. We are currently working on making OSM based map content visible in select capable Polar wrist device models but because of the limited capabilities of the devices, their form factor and usability considerations, we cannot fully comply with OpenStreetMap (and OpenMapTiles) attribution requirements. Therefore,we've worked on designing an approach which ensures best possible usability, is feasible for us to implement, and yet respects the attribution requirements in the best possible way. Please take a look at the attached material (PolarOfflineMaps_Attributions.pdf) for more details.I would like to kindly ask You whether:

1. OSMF would approve the way Polar intends to respect the attribution requirements?
2. OSMF would require any changes e.g. to the OSM attribution text?

If just possible I would highly appreciate an answer within a week's time so that we couldproceed with the implementation as soon as possible.

Company is producing heart rate monitors, looking at attribution on small screen.
They're asking if we're comfortable with their alternative design.
Seems like what Apple does. They don't have any other logo or map providers.
Looking at their UI, if you wonder where they got their map data, this can be found quickly.

Suggestion: Add to the attribution guidelines, if nothing comparable exists.
Comment that there was disagreement when this was discussed during drafting the attribution guidelines, so it was left out as it was a rare case.

Action item: Kathleen to say we are reviewing, thank you for efforts.

Next Meetings

2023 LWG meeting dates:

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 59' after the start.

Navigation menu

Licensing Working Group/Minutes/2023-05-15

Contents

Participants

Absent

Previous action items

Reportage and action item updates

Bing Mapbuilder – is LWG’s portion complete?

onwheelsapp - Ticket#2023031810000097

Serbian data import - Ticket#2023030810000178

Any updates on reported attribution cases?

Love letters

Trademarks – any updates?

Guillaume - HOT trademark agreement update

Guillaume - Evidence of use in Philippines status – done?

Simon - Any new notices

"Open Street" in Japan

How to pass tickets to OWG, or does OWG have a template answer?

Digital Services Act

Where to forward user deletion requests?

Any way to block address in OTRS? Junk mail levels have become intolerable

Queries to legal-questions

Ticket#2023032410000272 – Asesoría

Ticket#2023040710000258 – Geo-fencing patents

Official OSM merchandise

Polar Electro

Next Meetings