Reading the templates at Import/Getting permission - OpenStreetMap Wiki it is obvious that this is targeted towards large data source providers Eg: a governmental body (administration wide data) or Aerial imagery provider (Coverage wide), etc…
I had the idea of getting waivers from minor data sources like advertising posters of a residential area from a (residential area) developer or building designs for mall, etc… in mass
I was wondering what the general guideline for something like this is, going by the templates actions such as signing a form or making a public statement (which I think is interpreted to be formal, as in you have to make a separate section in your website that isn’t actively developed ) seem like too high of a barrier to expect of a random helpful person to cross
Shouldn’t a statement in mail suffice ? after all these are relatively minor sources, legal high ground at a moderate level should be enough (even after consideration of whiter-than-white nature of the project)
if you do decide to get these waivers, what is the process for documenting them ? i assume it will need to be treated differently than major waivers due to its notability
The import process isn’t really intended for small-scale things, especially where licenses are not compatible.
If the data isn’t already public domain (the legal meaning of “public domain”) or CC0-licensed or one of the very specific licenses on Licence/Licence Compatibility - OpenStreetMap Foundation, you will probably find it not worth it getting small amounts of data relicensed. It will probably be more feasible to do the mapping manually by tracing from allowable aerial imagery or surveying on the ground.
As your recent edits are in India you might also be interested in the fact that Government Open Data License - India - OpenStreetMap Wiki is likely compatible for import. But that’s for government data released under that specific license.
@Jarek I am more looking at things like housenumbers which cannot be mapped by imagery, also in closed residences the option to map by survey is closed
Also I am not really getting data relicensed, I am talking about getting permission to integrate into osm (mabye waiving was the wrong word to use)
Something like this from the tempelate:
“The #ORGANISATION# has no objections to geodata derived in part from dataset# being incorporated into the OpenStreetMap project geodata database and released under a free and open license”
Yeah I feel that. Unless those house numbers appears in some government open data, in practice it’ll probably go unmapped, unless you do get some data owners to agree to the statement (which, as I understand it, although I’m not a lawyer, is effectively re-licensing the data). But even then it might not be worth it going through the whole import process for the sake of one subdivision’s worth of house numbers. That’s just down to how OSM works - the “open” part is very important.
I think the redeeming factor here is the ease of doing this is mass, it would take relatively low effort to send a mail to 50 or so people once you have a general tempelate
Again this works only if a statement at the email level is sufficient where your chances of a agreement on the first try is relatively high if your mail is convincing enough
I didn’t understand your section on openness, can you rephrase the section to clarify your meaning ?
I guess it was discussed somewhere here before, but I have the opinion that it also really depends on cultural circumstances.
Speaking by my personal experiences: for example, in Latin countries, it is almost impossible to have a super formal waiver signed by the mayor or someone like that. At the same time, it is quite easy to obtain official answers by email. So, a clear “yes, you can use this data on OSM” by e-mail is not enough? I wouldn’t say so.
However, in Germany, bureaucracy is taken to another level. So the above behavior is not tolerated by a fellow German mapper, because they are used to receiving formal government letters by mail (not e-mail), and they expect the same level of waivers in OSM.
So, a “whiter-than-white” truly depends on who you are asking (and where they come from).
Edit: the waiver proposed by OSM lawyers clearly aims for big stuff. Hard to use on a normal level (let’s say, asking for a small, specific data, by a small company or a small city department).
Culturally, OpenStreetMap would rather be incomplete but fully and properly open-licensed, than have more data but have some of it come from “minor copyright waivers” that result in unclear copyright status for the whole project.