TaraV
(Tara V)
4
Thank you for your welcome and extensive information.
In terms of licensing, I agree there is room to question it. We’ve seen different sets where sometimes under adequate licensing, organizations can make a ‘new product’ derived from segments of primary sources, enriching, combining or modifying them. If they comply with respective licensing/legal agreements with primary sources, this ‘new product’ could be used/modified/distributed further as a separate dataset (and can, depending on legal agreements with primary sources, be licensed differently). I am not familiar with how geoLab processed and collected this dataset, but to avoid any misunderstanding I believe they should be contacted for further confirmation.
About using primary/original sources (mentioned Thailand - Subnational Administrative Boundaries - Humanitarian Data Exchange (humdata.org)) this dataset seems to contain more information and could be more useful in those terms. From our previous experiences with other humdata.org OCHA sets, they stated that for clearing up licensing they would need to contact the primary source (usually government institutions) that are not always disposable for these types of interpretations. We could try going through this process ourselves for this set, but it is probably a lengthy one with smaller chances of success.
There is a possibility that geoLab already went through that process and received direct licensing for partial information or all of it. To make sure, I will write to geoLab to clarify the licensing a bit more for the particular set referring to districts and will share the answer here when I receive it.
1 Like