Re: [Osmf-talk] ODbL text

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

Re: [Osmf-talk] ODbL text

SimonPoole

Currently I'm pointing to http://web.archive.org/web/20180317184051/https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ however as the opendatacommons.org links are all over the place that isn't really a solution. OKI seems to be aware of the issue, but that is about all what we know (they seem to be intending to move the site to a static website, but there doesn't seem to be a time line or anything available that would indicate if that will happen soon or in a decade).

I'm sure waving some $ bills in the direction of OKI/Viderum would get it fixed pronto, but it is obviously an undesirable situation that we are depending on a third party that doesn't seem to be interested to provide a stable link to our licence terms.

Simon


Am 04.04.2018 um 11:27 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:


2018-04-04 10:23 GMT+02:00 Javier Sánchez Portero <[hidden email]>:
Hello

My name is Javier Sánchez, from Spain.

The link to the ODbL 1.0 License [1] is not available since January. This is an annoyance if trying to ask for explicit permission to any data source. Is there any alternative reference? Should not be fine that OSMF provide a copy of the text in their site while opendatacommons.org is down?

[1] https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/

Regards, Javier



I agree we should host our own copy of the license.

If you need the license text urgently, you can find it here in the Internet Archive (not a general solution obviously):
https://web.archive.org/web/20180316015654/https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/

This is a snapshot from yesterday, so somehow they got through, but I confirm I didn't ge the page either, Error 522.

Cheers,
Martin


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


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

signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Osmf-talk] ODbL text

James-2
why not host it on the osmf website?

On Sun, Apr 8, 2018, 5:46 AM Simon Poole, <[hidden email]> wrote:

Currently I'm pointing to http://web.archive.org/web/20180317184051/https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ however as the opendatacommons.org links are all over the place that isn't really a solution. OKI seems to be aware of the issue, but that is about all what we know (they seem to be intending to move the site to a static website, but there doesn't seem to be a time line or anything available that would indicate if that will happen soon or in a decade).

I'm sure waving some $ bills in the direction of OKI/Viderum would get it fixed pronto, but it is obviously an undesirable situation that we are depending on a third party that doesn't seem to be interested to provide a stable link to our licence terms.

Simon


Am 04.04.2018 um 11:27 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:


2018-04-04 10:23 GMT+02:00 Javier Sánchez Portero <[hidden email]>:
Hello

My name is Javier Sánchez, from Spain.

The link to the ODbL 1.0 License [1] is not available since January. This is an annoyance if trying to ask for explicit permission to any data source. Is there any alternative reference? Should not be fine that OSMF provide a copy of the text in their site while opendatacommons.org is down?

[1] https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/

Regards, Javier



I agree we should host our own copy of the license.

If you need the license text urgently, you can find it here in the Internet Archive (not a general solution obviously):
https://web.archive.org/web/20180316015654/https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/

This is a snapshot from yesterday, so somehow they got through, but I confirm I didn't ge the page either, Error 522.

Cheers,
Martin


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

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

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

Re: [Osmf-talk] ODbL text

SimonPoole



Am 08.04.2018 um 13:30 schrieb James:
why not host it on the osmf website?

Because we don't own the domain (which is what most references to the actual text use) and are not the curators of the licence (aka we could in principle simply covertly change the text of the license, having a third party publish the text is in principle a good idea for such reasons).
 
Simon

PS: that doesn't mean that having our own clean copy as a backup wouldn't be a good idea, but IMHO the pointer to archive.org is probably the best of all bad solutions right now.

On Sun, Apr 8, 2018, 5:46 AM Simon Poole, <[hidden email]> wrote:

Currently I'm pointing to http://web.archive.org/web/20180317184051/https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ however as the opendatacommons.org links are all over the place that isn't really a solution. OKI seems to be aware of the issue, but that is about all what we know (they seem to be intending to move the site to a static website, but there doesn't seem to be a time line or anything available that would indicate if that will happen soon or in a decade).

I'm sure waving some $ bills in the direction of OKI/Viderum would get it fixed pronto, but it is obviously an undesirable situation that we are depending on a third party that doesn't seem to be interested to provide a stable link to our licence terms.

Simon


Am 04.04.2018 um 11:27 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:


2018-04-04 10:23 GMT+02:00 Javier Sánchez Portero <[hidden email]>:
Hello

My name is Javier Sánchez, from Spain.

The link to the ODbL 1.0 License [1] is not available since January. This is an annoyance if trying to ask for explicit permission to any data source. Is there any alternative reference? Should not be fine that OSMF provide a copy of the text in their site while opendatacommons.org is down?

[1] https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/

Regards, Javier



I agree we should host our own copy of the license.

If you need the license text urgently, you can find it here in the Internet Archive (not a general solution obviously):
https://web.archive.org/web/20180316015654/https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/

This is a snapshot from yesterday, so somehow they got through, but I confirm I didn't ge the page either, Error 522.

Cheers,
Martin


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

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


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

signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Osmf-talk] ODbL text

James-2
Just because you are not the curator of the license doesnt mean you cant display the full legal text somewhere else...The text wont change. GPL, LGPL, BSD, etc projects usually distribute their software with a license text file with the full legal text and dont depend on 1 single point of failure

On Sun, Apr 8, 2018, 8:13 AM Simon Poole, <[hidden email]> wrote:



Am 08.04.2018 um 13:30 schrieb James:
why not host it on the osmf website?

Because we don't own the domain (which is what most references to the actual text use) and are not the curators of the licence (aka we could in principle simply covertly change the text of the license, having a third party publish the text is in principle a good idea for such reasons).
 
Simon

PS: that doesn't mean that having our own clean copy as a backup wouldn't be a good idea, but IMHO the pointer to archive.org is probably the best of all bad solutions right now.

On Sun, Apr 8, 2018, 5:46 AM Simon Poole, <[hidden email]> wrote:

Currently I'm pointing to http://web.archive.org/web/20180317184051/https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ however as the opendatacommons.org links are all over the place that isn't really a solution. OKI seems to be aware of the issue, but that is about all what we know (they seem to be intending to move the site to a static website, but there doesn't seem to be a time line or anything available that would indicate if that will happen soon or in a decade).

I'm sure waving some $ bills in the direction of OKI/Viderum would get it fixed pronto, but it is obviously an undesirable situation that we are depending on a third party that doesn't seem to be interested to provide a stable link to our licence terms.

Simon


Am 04.04.2018 um 11:27 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:


2018-04-04 10:23 GMT+02:00 Javier Sánchez Portero <[hidden email]>:
Hello

My name is Javier Sánchez, from Spain.

The link to the ODbL 1.0 License [1] is not available since January. This is an annoyance if trying to ask for explicit permission to any data source. Is there any alternative reference? Should not be fine that OSMF provide a copy of the text in their site while opendatacommons.org is down?

[1] https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/

Regards, Javier



I agree we should host our own copy of the license.

If you need the license text urgently, you can find it here in the Internet Archive (not a general solution obviously):
https://web.archive.org/web/20180316015654/https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/

This is a snapshot from yesterday, so somehow they got through, but I confirm I didn't ge the page either, Error 522.

Cheers,
Martin


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

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


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

Re: [Osmf-talk] ODbL text

sabas88
Hi,
I linked this thread to Rufus Pollock and the opendatacommons website is now up again.
The OKFN chat is here https://gitter.im/okfn/chat

Regards,
Stefano

2018-04-08 14:18 GMT+02:00 James <[hidden email]>:
Just because you are not the curator of the license doesnt mean you cant display the full legal text somewhere else...The text wont change. GPL, LGPL, BSD, etc projects usually distribute their software with a license text file with the full legal text and dont depend on 1 single point of failure

On Sun, Apr 8, 2018, 8:13 AM Simon Poole, <[hidden email]> wrote:



Am 08.04.2018 um 13:30 schrieb James:
why not host it on the osmf website?

Because we don't own the domain (which is what most references to the actual text use) and are not the curators of the licence (aka we could in principle simply covertly change the text of the license, having a third party publish the text is in principle a good idea for such reasons).
 
Simon

PS: that doesn't mean that having our own clean copy as a backup wouldn't be a good idea, but IMHO the pointer to archive.org is probably the best of all bad solutions right now.

On Sun, Apr 8, 2018, 5:46 AM Simon Poole, <[hidden email]> wrote:

Currently I'm pointing to http://web.archive.org/web/20180317184051/https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ however as the opendatacommons.org links are all over the place that isn't really a solution. OKI seems to be aware of the issue, but that is about all what we know (they seem to be intending to move the site to a static website, but there doesn't seem to be a time line or anything available that would indicate if that will happen soon or in a decade).

I'm sure waving some $ bills in the direction of OKI/Viderum would get it fixed pronto, but it is obviously an undesirable situation that we are depending on a third party that doesn't seem to be interested to provide a stable link to our licence terms.

Simon


Am 04.04.2018 um 11:27 schrieb Martin Koppenhoefer:


2018-04-04 10:23 GMT+02:00 Javier Sánchez Portero <[hidden email]>:
Hello

My name is Javier Sánchez, from Spain.

The link to the ODbL 1.0 License [1] is not available since January. This is an annoyance if trying to ask for explicit permission to any data source. Is there any alternative reference? Should not be fine that OSMF provide a copy of the text in their site while opendatacommons.org is down?

[1] https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/

Regards, Javier



I agree we should host our own copy of the license.

If you need the license text urgently, you can find it here in the Internet Archive (not a general solution obviously):
https://web.archive.org/web/20180316015654/https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/

This is a snapshot from yesterday, so somehow they got through, but I confirm I didn't ge the page either, Error 522.

Cheers,
Martin


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

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


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



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

Re: [Osmf-talk] ODbL text

Michael Kugelmann
In reply to this post by SimonPoole
On 08.04.2018 at 14:12 Simon Poole wrote:
> PS: that doesn't mean that having our own clean copy as a backup
> wouldn't be a good idea,
I very much encourage the OSMF to host a copy of the license as the OSMF
distributes their data (=> the raw OSM data)  using this license. This
could be clearly marked as a copy with reference to the original one.

> but IMHO the pointer to archive.org is probably the best of all bad
> solutions right now.
Is there a way to support open data commons / OKF with their problems
(or maybe even make a *friendly* push to get their problems sorted out)?

BR,
Michael.


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

Re: [Osmf-talk] ODbL text

SimonPoole


Am 09.04.2018 um 00:30 schrieb Michael Kugelmann:

> On 08.04.2018 at 14:12 Simon Poole wrote:
>> PS: that doesn't mean that having our own clean copy as a backup
>> wouldn't be a good idea,
> I very much encourage the OSMF to host a copy of the license as the
> OSMF distributes their data (=> the raw OSM data)  using this license.
> This could be clearly marked as a copy with reference to the original
> one.
>
>> but IMHO the pointer to archive.org is probably the best of all bad
>> solutions right now.
> Is there a way to support open data commons / OKF with their problems
> (or maybe even make a *friendly* push to get their problems sorted out)?
>
If it wasn't clear the issue was already reported quite a while back and
then again by me, they eventually woke up to the issue yesterday and
have since fixed it.

As to keeping our own copy, while that gives some redundancy, to make it
useful we would need to fix all the links out there and short term I
don't see anybody having time, and in the end we would -still- need the
ODC link to work for all documents that we can't retroactively change.

Simon


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

signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment