Re: [Imports] [Talk-us-newyork] Draft proposal for import of New York State GIS SAM Address Points

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Imports] [Talk-us-newyork] Draft proposal for import of New York State GIS SAM Address Points

stevea
> On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 1:24 PM Brian May <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> We really need some pages on the wiki that explain the basics of Public
>> Records laws state by state.

I agree and support this notion, however, I'm (currently) burnt out on wiki-writing (this will eventually pass, I'm sure), especially as I ponder starting / participating in a new, large-ish, comprehensive project like "Public Records Laws, state by state" (and that I continue to work on our United States/Public Lands wiki and other efforts like USA Rail and USBRS).

I can start by "seeding" the fact that California GIS data published by the state (or equivalents, like its counties) are fully available in the public domain for free with no license, and hence OSM under our ODbL.  There were a couple of California State Supreme Court rulings that definitively established this, the major one being "Sierra Club v. County of Orange."  I agree it is a patchwork in the other 49 states and that to track this would help guide effective addition of public data to OSM (where it makes sense to do so, for example with municipal / city limit boundaries where these are currently missing).  There are also present efforts to help boost "protected area" data in OSM in the USA.  These are somewhat new and emerging, but look to be excellent data and methodologies.  Of course, such efforts must follow our Import Guidelines should they become distinct projects to implement a real importation of such data.

We can also take heart that all data published at the federal level by the US government (unless they are "classified," as in military secrets) are also public domain, so, also open to OSM under our ODbL.

It shouldn't be too much effort to grow what the status is in any given state in a simple wiki, perhaps with an easy table, which captures this knowledge.  Thank you in advance to anybody willing and able to take this on and grow it to all 50 states.

If crossposting this to both imports-us and talk-us is not appropriate, please accept my apologies and correct my behavior.

SteveA
_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Imports] [Talk-us-newyork] Draft proposal for import of New York State GIS SAM Address Points

Brian May
On 1/9/2021 6:02 PM, stevea wrote:

>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 1:24 PM Brian May <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> We really need some pages on the wiki that explain the basics of Public
>>> Records laws state by state.
> I agree and support this notion, however, I'm (currently) burnt out on wiki-writing (this will eventually pass, I'm sure), especially as I ponder starting / participating in a new, large-ish, comprehensive project like "Public Records Laws, state by state" (and that I continue to work on our United States/Public Lands wiki and other efforts like USA Rail and USBRS).
>
> I can start by "seeding" the fact that California GIS data published by the state (or equivalents, like its counties) are fully available in the public domain for free with no license, and hence OSM under our ODbL.  There were a couple of California State Supreme Court rulings that definitively established this, the major one being "Sierra Club v. County of Orange."  I agree it is a patchwork in the other 49 states and that to track this would help guide effective addition of public data to OSM (where it makes sense to do so, for example with municipal / city limit boundaries where these are currently missing).  There are also present efforts to help boost "protected area" data in OSM in the USA.  These are somewhat new and emerging, but look to be excellent data and methodologies.  Of course, such efforts must follow our Import Guidelines should they become distinct projects to implement a real importation of such data.
>
> We can also take heart that all data published at the federal level by the US government (unless they are "classified," as in military secrets) are also public domain, so, also open to OSM under our ODbL.
>
> It shouldn't be too much effort to grow what the status is in any given state in a simple wiki, perhaps with an easy table, which captures this knowledge.  Thank you in advance to anybody willing and able to take this on and grow it to all 50 states.
>
> If crossposting this to both imports-us and talk-us is not appropriate, please accept my apologies and correct my behavior.
>
> SteveA
>
Thanks for info about California. I wonder if the map on this US
Department of Transportation page may be a starting point. This is a
status page / maps of the US DOT effort to collect, standardize and
publish address data that it acquires from states:
https://www.transportation.gov/gis/national-address-database/national-address-database-0

What is interesting is that in order for US Department of Transportation
to use address data from states, the data must be in public domain,
right? New York is submitted and good to go. As are many other states.
It clearly shows states where the data is not in public domain. However,
more research needed, because as we know the data not considered public
domain could still be under licensing that is OSM compatible, but US
government requires public domain.

Brian



_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Imports] [Talk-us-newyork] Draft proposal for import of New York State GIS SAM Address Points

Lukas Richert
I was thinking of a similar project in Arizona -  most of the metro
Phoenix cities have Open Data and there is already a wiki page
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Arizona_Open_Data

On 10/01/2021 04:36, Brian May wrote:

> On 1/9/2021 6:02 PM, stevea wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 1:24 PM Brian May <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> We really need some pages on the wiki that explain the basics of
>>>> Public
>>>> Records laws state by state.
>> I agree and support this notion, however, I'm (currently) burnt out
>> on wiki-writing (this will eventually pass, I'm sure), especially as
>> I ponder starting / participating in a new, large-ish, comprehensive
>> project like "Public Records Laws, state by state" (and that I
>> continue to work on our United States/Public Lands wiki and other
>> efforts like USA Rail and USBRS).
>>
>> I can start by "seeding" the fact that California GIS data published
>> by the state (or equivalents, like its counties) are fully available
>> in the public domain for free with no license, and hence OSM under
>> our ODbL.  There were a couple of California State Supreme Court
>> rulings that definitively established this, the major one being
>> "Sierra Club v. County of Orange."  I agree it is a patchwork in the
>> other 49 states and that to track this would help guide effective
>> addition of public data to OSM (where it makes sense to do so, for
>> example with municipal / city limit boundaries where these are
>> currently missing).  There are also present efforts to help boost
>> "protected area" data in OSM in the USA.  These are somewhat new and
>> emerging, but look to be excellent data and methodologies.  Of
>> course, such efforts must follow our Import Guidelines should they
>> become distinct projects to implement a real importation of such data.
>>
>> We can also take heart that all data published at the federal level
>> by the US government (unless they are "classified," as in military
>> secrets) are also public domain, so, also open to OSM under our ODbL.
>>
>> It shouldn't be too much effort to grow what the status is in any
>> given state in a simple wiki, perhaps with an easy table, which
>> captures this knowledge.  Thank you in advance to anybody willing and
>> able to take this on and grow it to all 50 states.
>>
>> If crossposting this to both imports-us and talk-us is not
>> appropriate, please accept my apologies and correct my behavior.
>>
>> SteveA
>>
> Thanks for info about California. I wonder if the map on this US
> Department of Transportation page may be a starting point. This is a
> status page / maps of the US DOT effort to collect, standardize and
> publish address data that it acquires from states:
> https://www.transportation.gov/gis/national-address-database/national-address-database-0
>
> What is interesting is that in order for US Department of
> Transportation to use address data from states, the data must be in
> public domain, right? New York is submitted and good to go. As are
> many other states. It clearly shows states where the data is not in
> public domain. However, more research needed, because as we know the
> data not considered public domain could still be under licensing that
> is OSM compatible, but US government requires public domain.
>
> Brian
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Talk-us mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Imports] [Talk-us-newyork] Draft proposal for import of New York State GIS SAM Address Points

Mark Wagner
In reply to this post by stevea
On Sat, 9 Jan 2021 15:02:54 -0800
stevea <[hidden email]> wrote:

> We can also take heart that all data published at the federal level
> by the US government (unless they are "classified," as in military
> secrets) are also public domain, so, also open to OSM under our ODbL.

*New York Times v. United States* established that classified
information is also in the public domain.  If you can get a copy of the
latest spy-satellite imagery for a place, you can freely use it for
mapping, although the person who leaked it to you could be in a whole
lot of trouble.

--
Mark

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Imports] [Talk-us-newyork] Draft proposal for import of New York State GIS SAM Address Points

USA mailing list
In reply to this post by Lukas Richert
Works by contractors of the federal government may still be under copyright. I expect this to apply to works of state governments and agents thereof.

For example, the NAD has this note:

Dark Purple color indicates the data may not be in the public domain for the following (6) whole states: Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, New Hampshire, North Dakota, and South Carolina; and the following (3) partial states including parts of Colorado, Maryland, and South Dakota.


Jan 10, 2021, 03:43 by [hidden email]:
I was thinking of a similar project in Arizona -  most of the metro Phoenix cities have Open Data and there is already a wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Arizona_Open_Data

On 10/01/2021 04:36, Brian May wrote:
On 1/9/2021 6:02 PM, stevea wrote:
On Sat, Jan 9, 2021 at 1:24 PM Brian May <[hidden email]> wrote:
We really need some pages on the wiki that explain the basics of Public
Records laws state by state.
I agree and support this notion, however, I'm (currently) burnt out on wiki-writing (this will eventually pass, I'm sure), especially as I ponder starting / participating in a new, large-ish, comprehensive project like "Public Records Laws, state by state" (and that I continue to work on our United States/Public Lands wiki and other efforts like USA Rail and USBRS).

I can start by "seeding" the fact that California GIS data published by the state (or equivalents, like its counties) are fully available in the public domain for free with no license, and hence OSM under our ODbL.  There were a couple of California State Supreme Court rulings that definitively established this, the major one being "Sierra Club v. County of Orange."  I agree it is a patchwork in the other 49 states and that to track this would help guide effective addition of public data to OSM (where it makes sense to do so, for example with municipal / city limit boundaries where these are currently missing).  There are also present efforts to help boost "protected area" data in OSM in the USA.  These are somewhat new and emerging, but look to be excellent data and methodologies.  Of course, such efforts must follow our Import Guidelines should they become distinct projects to implement a real importation of such data.

We can also take heart that all data published at the federal level by the US government (unless they are "classified," as in military secrets) are also public domain, so, also open to OSM under our ODbL.

It shouldn't be too much effort to grow what the status is in any given state in a simple wiki, perhaps with an easy table, which captures this knowledge.  Thank you in advance to anybody willing and able to take this on and grow it to all 50 states.

If crossposting this to both imports-us and talk-us is not appropriate, please accept my apologies and correct my behavior.

SteveA
Thanks for info about California. I wonder if the map on this US Department of Transportation page may be a starting point. This is a status page / maps of the US DOT effort to collect, standardize and publish address data that it acquires from states: https://www.transportation.gov/gis/national-address-database/national-address-database-0

What is interesting is that in order for US Department of Transportation to use address data from states, the data must be in public domain, right? New York is submitted and good to go. As are many other states. It clearly shows states where the data is not in public domain. However, more research needed, because as we know the data not considered public domain could still be under licensing that is OSM compatible, but US government requires public domain.

Brian



_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us


_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Imports] [Talk-us-newyork] Draft proposal for import of New York State GIS SAM Address Points

Kevin Kenny-3
On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 7:14 PM IsStatenIsland via Talk-us <[hidden email]> wrote:
Works by contractors of the federal government may still be under copyright. I expect this to apply to works of state governments and agents thereof.

For example, the NAD has this note:

Dark Purple color indicates the data may not be in the public domain for the following (6) whole states: Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, New Hampshire, North Dakota, and South Carolina; and the following (3) partial states including parts of Colorado, Maryland, and South Dakota.

Correct. Note that New York is not on that list. The state government was able to persuade the counties to release the E911 address point datasets into the public domain. 

--
73 de ke9tv/2, Kevin

_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Imports] [Talk-us-newyork] Draft proposal for import of New York State GIS SAM Address Points

Brian May
In reply to this post by USA mailing list
True. This issue usually comes up when a government purchases a license from a private company to use an existing data set the company provides.

However, if the government is contracting for services to help build a database that must be public domain or otherwise "open", they cannot contract with a company demanding proprietary rights. When I worked for a state government agency and we contracted out data development, the contractual language always specified the resulting work was the property of the state and not the company. Basic work for hire doctrine.

There could be other issues at play regarding the states pointed out below. The Feds running the NAD project require the data is public domain. Number one may be the fact that those states either do not explicitly declare the data is public domain, the license is ambiguous, or they assert some other license which still may be compatible with OSM (and OpenAddresses, etc). Or they may explicitly declare GIS data is "special" and put limits on it. More research required.

Brian

On 1/20/2021 7:11 PM, IsStatenIsland via Talk-us wrote:
Works by contractors of the federal government may still be under copyright. I expect this to apply to works of state governments and agents thereof.

For example, the NAD has this note:

Dark Purple color indicates the data may not be in the public domain for the following (6) whole states: Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, New Hampshire, North Dakota, and South Carolina; and the following (3) partial states including parts of Colorado, Maryland, and South Dakota.


_______________________________________________
Talk-us mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us