Open Database License
 |
We are changing the license. Please help with asking users to accept the ODbL and remapping to make sure that their hard work doesn't get lost. |
The OpenStreetMap project is proposing to move to a new license, known as the Open Database License (ODbL) which would replace the existing CC-BY-SA 2.0 license due to problems with the CC-BY SA license when applied to data. The license is intended to clarify the terms under which people make contributions to the project and the terms under which people can use the data. It is basically a share alike license for data.
Contents |
Overview
The proposed license comes in three parts. One, the Open Database License (ODbL) with the Database Contents License (DbCL) covers the database itself and the contents of the database; and a set of upgraded Contributor Terms covers the submissions to the database.
The Foundation supports the adoption of this license and has reviewed it with their lawyers. The proposed license has been developed by OpenDataCommons a project of the Open Knowledge Foundation. This OpenStreetMap Foundation process is documented here at the Foundation's website. We also welcome any review and comment by other bodies working in the open intellectual properties rights arena.
In 2009, the Foundation's License Working Group has presented a proposal document to the Foundation board and then to OSMF members and for public comment. A summary was also presented at the State Of The Map 2009 conference.
Here is the least legalese summary of the new license and why:
These are the main resources for and against the change:
- The proposal document is the OSMF's formal case why the license change should take place as planned.
- Why You Should Vote Yes is a wiki page where mappers who support the new license can put their case.
- Why You Should Decline is a wiki page where mappers who do not support the new license can put their case.
Where we are now
OPENSTREETMAP DATA IS NOT YET AVAILABLE UNDER THE NEW LICENSE. The initial change over phase began 12th May 2010. New contributors are being asked to license their data under both the new and old license as part of the signup during a transitional period. Existing contributors are asked to re-license their contributions under the new license; they can say no but unless they make a decision either way, they cannot continue editing. Since (ca. July 2011) only those who agreed to the relicensing process are able to continue editing. When (and if!) a critical mass has been achieved, the old license will no longer be used on the current database. Prior copies of the database will be continue to be available under CC BY SA as long as there is demand.
We have a proposed adoption plan. This is not cast in stone and we welcome direct comments on the discussion page for the plan.
Resources
The following resources are available to support the consultation and decision making.
OpenStreetMap
- Legal Structure Describing how the license should work from a legal perspective.
- Implementation Plan Covering details of the proposed implementation.
- FAQ Answers to some common questions about why the license change is desirable.
- Background to licence change Background to OpenStreetMap licensing and licensing of data
- Community Guidelines - this is a proposed method for better defining certain legal terms in the specific and practical context of using OpenStreetMap data.
- Substantial - Guideline ODbL uses the term "Substantial", OpenStreetMap's view of what is substantial in our context.
- Produced Work
- Bulk Import Support Page - Resources for anyone who has imported data from third parties and needs to check license compatibility.
- Use Cases Some common uses of OSM data against which the license can be checked.
- Open Issues Various questions relating to the license which still need to be resolved.
- Implementation Issues Practical issues on getting the license adopted.
- Suggested Changes Some specific proposals to change the license text.
- Licensing Working Group A group set up by the foundation to support the process.
- Proposed Contributor Terms
- Legal-talk email list The main OpenStreetMap email list for legal discussions relating to the license change.
- Talk email list Discussion also takes place on the main OpenStreetMap 'talk' list
- List of email lists During the implementation stage discussions are likely to take place on all OpenStreetMap email lists
- Resources - General documents and links of interest to Open Data IP (Intellectual Property).
OpenStreetMap Foundation
If you are looking for a final set of all the documents, here they are:
- Contributor Terms - Individual contributors need to agree to these terms before contributing.
- Human readable summary of the Contributor Terms
- Database Contents License (DbCL) - Contributors waive all rights in the individual Contents of a Database licensed under the ODbL. In the text, 'Licensor' means the contributor and 'You' means the Foundation. This effectively means that end users of data published by the Foundation need to study only the ODbL rather than worrying about any special copyrights on individual elements of the database.
- Open Database License (ODbL) 1.0 This is the license under which the Foundation will publish the entire geodata set. End users of OpenStreetMap need to comply with this license.
- Human readable summary of the ODbL license
- Community Guidelines - Some of the terms in the ODbL need further clarifying in terms of geodata. This is a guide to end users created by the OpenStreetMap contributor community. It will evolve over time.
- 'We Are Changing The License' - Existing contributors will be asked to re-license their data under the new license, this gives them an overview of why.
- 'License Change Proposal' - this document is out-dated by gives a fuller overview of the perceived need for a license change and the primary goals.
- 'Why would I want my contributions to be public domain'. When new contributors sign-up, they can optionally tick a box "I consider my contributions to be in the Public Domain". This document gives them more information.
And for more background:
- The OpenStreetMap Foundation website
- The OpenStreetMap license - Overview of how to use OpenStreetMap data under the currrent license
- License Working Group's license change proposal document - a good overall picture, but out of date.
- OSMF:License/We_Are_Changing_The_License - An overview for contributors on why the license change.
- Working Group Minutes - All the License Working Group meetings are here
- Mailing list for OpenStreetMap Foundation members
Open Knowledge Foundation
- Guide to Open Data Licensing
- OpenDataCommons
- ODC-Discuss The main email list of the Open Knowedge Foundation to discuss the proposed license
ODbL reviews from lawyers
- ITO World/ODbL Licence 0.9 legal review for ITO
- Axel Metzger: Open Database License (ODbL) veröffentlicht (German)
- Arnoud Engelfriet: Open source databanken: de OpenDatabankLicentie versie 1.0 (Dutch)
OSMF Members Vote - 2009
In December 2009, OSM Foundation members voted on whether they wished to put the current version of the new license to the community for adoption and then begin the adoption process itself. The results from 270 members polled are:
| Approved the process: | 132 |
| Did not approve the process: | 16 |
| Didn't vote: | 122 |
alternatively,
| Turnout rate: | 55% |
| Yes: | 89% |
| No: | 11% |
So almost 49% of the members agreed to the proposal.
Community members can also participate in an inofficial opinion poll on the license change at http://doodle.com/feqszqirqqxi4r7w
As of January 3rd, the results of that poll are:
| yes, I will accept the new license Odbl | 127 |
| yes and consider all my data Public domain (no restrictions) | 177 |
| no, I will not accept the new license Odbl but I will if the license is reworked | 14 |
| no, I will not accept the new license Odbl and wants to continue with the CC-BY-SA2.0 license | 42 |
| I don't know yet because I don't understand the new license or the possible consequences | 51 |
i.e.:
| Yes: | 74% |
| No: | 14% |
| Undecided: | 12% |
Of those that answered yes or no:
| Yes: | 84% |
| No: | 16% |
