Korea Open Government License

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
  • Korea Open Government License
  • In other languages

This article's factual accuracy is disputed.

information icon

This document is originally written in Korean. When editing the Korean version based on translations in other languages, please make sure to verify the facts carefully. When translating, please use the Korean version as the primary source whenever possible.
For more recent updates or for more information, please see the Korean page.(Please check the update date to see if there is any newly updated content.)
이 문서는 한국어 판이 원본입니다. 다른 언어본을 바탕으로 한글 판을 고칠 때에는 사실 관계를 잘 확인하시기 바랍니다.(새로 보태올린 내용이 있는지는 업데이트 날짜를 통해 확인하시기 바랍니다.)

The Korea Open Government License (KOGL; 공공누리) is a standardised public copyright license established by the Republic of Korea's Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism. It enables third parties to freely use government-owned works without obtaining individual permission, provided they comply with the applicable license conditions.

However, KOGL's compatibility with ODbL — the license used by OpenStreetMap — has not been fully established. Depending on the type, KOGL is either clearly incompatible or legally uncertain in its compatibility with ODbL. This article analyses the compatibility issues by type, examines the conditions under which limited use may be possible, and provides guidance on the import procedure.

information icon

The content of this article does not constitute definitive legal advice and is intended for reference purposes only. Before making significant import decisions, please consult the OSMF Licensing Working Group directly at legal-talk@openstreetmap.org or seek advice from a qualified legal professional.

Purpose and Overview of KOGL

KOGL was established in 2012 under Article 24-2 of the Republic of Korea's Copyright Act (Free Use of Public Works). The legal framework was strengthened when the provision came fully into force on 1 July 2014. The license applies to works in which the state, local governments, or public institutions hold all or part of the copyright. Once the KOGL mark is attached, users may freely use the work within the conditions of the applicable type without seeking individual permission from the institution.

KOGL currently comprises six types (Types 0 through 4, plus an AI type). Each type differs in the restrictions it places on commercial use, modification, and the creation of derivative works.

The Open Database License (ODbL 1.0), developed by the Open Knowledge Foundation and adopted by the OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF) in September 2012, governs OSM data. Its core principles are: unrestricted commercial use, permission to modify and create derivative databases (Share-Alike), and irrevocability.

Compatibility between KOGL and ODbL

The following table summarises compatibility between each KOGL type and ODbL.

KOGL Type License Conditions Commercial Use Modification / Derivatives ODbL Compatibility Basis for Assessment
Type 0 (Free Use) None yes yes yes Compatible No conditions — ODbL requirements are met. OSM import procedure and verification of third-party rights still required.
Type 1 (Attribution) Attribution only yes yes maybe Unclear Superficially close to ODbL requirements, but multiple legal issues exist: relicensing not explicitly permitted, attribution method conflicts, possibility of license condition changes. Unusable without explicit permission.
Type 2 (Attribution + Non-Commercial) Attribution + no commercial use no yes no Incompatible Prohibition on commercial use directly conflicts with ODbL. Cannot be resolved without a comprehensive relicensing agreement from the data holder.
Type 3 (Attribution + No Derivatives) Attribution + no modification yes no no Incompatible Prohibition on modification and derivative databases directly conflicts with ODbL's core principles. Same resolution requirement as Type 2.
Type 4 (Attribution + Non-Commercial + No Derivatives) Attribution + no commercial use + no modification no no no Incompatible Most restrictive type. Equivalent to CC BY-NC-ND. Violates all core ODbL principles.
Expired Public Works (former Type 0) None (copyright expired) yes yes yes Compatible Public domain due to expiration of copyright protection. Independent verification of actual expiry and confirmation of third-party rights still required.

information icon

Key conclusion: Only Type 0 and expired public works are in principle compatible with ODbL. Types 2, 3, and 4 are clearly incompatible as they conflict with ODbL's fundamental principles. Type 1 is superficially the closest, but due to multiple legal issues, it cannot be used without explicit permission from the data-holding institution.

Essential requirements for compatibility with ODbL:

  • Commercial use must be permitted
  • Modification and creation of derivative databases must be permitted
  • Relicensing and redistribution under ODbL must be permitted
  • Indirect attribution (via the Contributors page) must be accepted as satisfying the attribution requirement
  • The license grant must be irrevocable

In-depth Legal Analysis of Type 1

Type 1 appears on the surface to satisfy ODbL requirements, since commercial use and modification are both permitted. However, the OSMF Licensing Working Group (LWG) and the OSM community maintain that Type 1 data cannot be used without explicit permission due to the following compounding legal issues.

No Explicit Permission for Relicensing — The Most Critical Issue

When data is contributed to OSM, it is automatically redistributed to all users worldwide under ODbL. This constitutes a conversion (relicensing) from the original license (KOGL Type 1) to different terms (ODbL).

The KOGL Type 1 license text contains no explicit statement permitting relicensing to ODbL. For comparison, OSMF treats CC BY 4.0 as incompatible for the same reason unless an explicit waiver is obtained (see the OSM blog post on CC BY 4.0 data). Given that KOGL has far less international precedent than CC BY 4.0, an even more conservative assessment is unavoidable.

At the heart of the OSMF Contributor Terms is the principle that contributors grant OSMF "a non-exclusive, worldwide, irrevocable license to redistribute contributions under any current or future free and open license." Whether KOGL Type 1 permits this broad grant of rights is the central legal question.

Structural Conflict with OSM's Attribution Method

KOGL Type 1 specifies a detailed attribution requirement. According to the official guidance, the required attribution includes all of the following: the name of the institution, the year of creation, the title of the work, the name of the author, and the URL of the institution's website, with a hyperlink required in online contexts.

information icon

Official example text: "This work uses '[title (author: name)]', created by '[institution name]' in '[year]' and released under KOGL Type [n], available for free download at '[institution name], [website URL]'." A hyperlink to the source website must be provided where technically possible.

OSM's attribution structure is fundamentally different. Under ODbL §4.3, a Produced Work (such as a rendered map) need only carry a notice reasonably calculated to make users aware that content was obtained from the OpenStreetMap database. In practice, this is satisfied by the notice '© OpenStreetMap contributors' linked to the OSM Contributors wiki page.

It is physically impossible to display individual attributions for thousands of data sources on every derivative map. Whether KOGL Type 1's specific requirements (institution name, work title, year, URL, hyperlink) are satisfied by OSM's indirect attribution mechanism is legally uncertain. OSMF requires explicit agreement from the institution to resolve this ambiguity.

The attribution requirements under KOGL are more detailed than a simple citation.

Note that although the license simply says "attribution", the actual attribution requirements include the institution name, year of production, work title, and source URL.[1]

License Instability due to Possibility of Changing Conditions

The KOGL Type 1 license conditions explicitly state (translated from Korean):

The terms of use of KOGL works may be changed. However, if a user has used the work before the terms are changed, the user may continue to use that particular work under its original terms without changing its purpose.

This conflicts with the irrevocability requirement that is central to OSMF's license compatibility standards. Data integrated into the OSM database is permanently preserved in version history and remains accessible to future users. If a license grant were retroactively revoked, all previously contributed data would be exposed to legal risk.

Wikimedia Commons has also debated the deletion of KOGL-licensed images on the grounds of this revocability clause.

Some legal commentators argue that this clause is based on a ministerial directive (a notice from the Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism) rather than the license text itself, and therefore has limited enforceability beyond the scope of the Copyright Act. However, this interpretation has not been established internationally.

Unclear Third-Party Copyright and Data Provenance

Even where a public institution attaches a KOGL mark, there is no guarantee that the institution holds the entirety of the economic copyright in the data. Where a public institution has commissioned a private contractor to produce data, copyright in the work — including the right to create derivative works — may remain with the original producer unless the contract explicitly provides for an assignment of rights.

OSMF requires contributors to take "reasonable measures to confirm that the licensor actually has the rights necessary to license the material." Even where a public institution applies a KOGL license, it is often unclear whether the institution has secured full economic rights — including from secondary rightsholders such as contracted producers. Responses from institutions that are vague, oral, by telephone, or contained in informal documents without explicit reference to the conditions of permission are not considered adequate.[2]

Lack of International Legal Precedent

KOGL is a domestic license grounded in the Korean copyright law framework. Unlike CC BY or the UK Open Government Licence (OGL), KOGL has almost no international precedent in terms of cross-border use cases, dispute resolution, or interaction with other international licenses. To minimise legal uncertainty, OSMF LWG applies a conservative policy requiring explicit permission for any license without established international precedent.

Grounds for Incompatibility of Types 2, 3, and 4

  • Type 2 (Non-Commercial): Per OSMF's official compatibility standards, "licences that prohibit certain uses or exclude certain fields of endeavour are incompatible with OSM." OSM data is used for purposes ranging from commercial navigation and real estate applications to academic research. Mixing data with a non-commercial restriction into the OSM database would structurally undermine the commercial usability of OSM data as a whole.
  • Type 3 (No Derivatives): OSM is a collaborative project that grows through daily contributions involving modification, addition, and deletion of data. Data that cannot be modified in the OSM database directly conflicts with OSM's operational principles. Any prohibition on modification or the creation of derivative databases is clearly incompatible with ODbL.
  • Type 4 (Non-Commercial + No Derivatives): The most restrictive type, combining the incompatibility grounds of both Types 2 and 3. Equivalent to CC BY-NC-ND. All core ODbL principles are violated, making use in OSM virtually impossible.

Obtaining Explicit Permission: Content and Procedure

Why Permission is Required

OSMF requires an explicit waiver even for internationally well-known licenses such as CC BY 4.0. Since KOGL Type 1 carries greater legal uncertainty than CC BY 4.0, explicit permission from the data-holding institution is essential.[3][4]

In practice, obtaining explicit permission to use KOGL Type 1 data in OSM can be simpler than expected. In many cases, it is sufficient to ask the institution whether it agrees to redistribution under ODbL terms. Institutions will sometimes grant permission simply upon being asked.

Essential Elements of the Permission Request

When contacting an institution, the following elements must be clearly communicated.

Item Description
Purpose of Use Contributing to OSM for the public benefit of improving map quality worldwide
How the Data Will Be Used The institution's data will be merged into and processed as part of the OSM database and published under the ODbL license to users worldwide
Explanation of ODbL OpenStreetMap shares data under ODbL 1.0. All merged data is distributed under ODbL and may be redistributed by any user for any purpose, including commercial use
Permission Required An explicit grant of permission for the institution's data to be merged into and redistributed as part of the OSM database under ODbL
Attribution Plan Attribution will be provided indirectly via the OSM wiki Contributors page and changeset comments; it is not practically possible to include a direct attribution to the institution on every derivative map
Irrevocability A request to confirm that this permission is irrevocable

Three Key Points to Confirm with the Institution

The following three points must be confirmed with the data-holding institution, ideally in writing.

  1. Confirmation that KOGL applies: Verify that KOGL is in fact applied to the specific dataset in question. This can be checked via the institution's website, dataset metadata, or the public data portal (data.go.kr).
  2. Permission for reuse under ODbL conditions: ODbL allows modification, combination, and processing of data; commercial and non-commercial reuse; and distribution of the whole under the same license conditions. The institution must confirm that the data may be freely used under OSM's ODbL conditions.
  3. Authority to grant redistribution rights to third parties: OSM requires contributors to be able to fully exercise the copyright or usage rights over the data they contribute. The institution must confirm that it has the authority to release the data for use by anyone.

Sample Permission Letter

[Institution Name] hereby grants permission for the OpenStreetMap Foundation (OSMF) and OSM contributors to incorporate the [Dataset Name] data into the OpenStreetMap database and to redistribute it for all purposes, including commercial use, under the Open Database License (ODbL) 1.0 (https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1-0/).

[Institution Name] acknowledges that attribution requirements may be satisfied through the OpenStreetMap wiki Contributors page (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors), and that it is not required for [Institution Name] to be individually credited on every derived work or map product.

This permission is irrevocable and is granted within the scope of the OSM Contributor Terms.

Date: ____________    Institution: ____________    Contact person: ____________    Signature: ____________

Attribution Notice Examples for OSM Contributions

Once permission has been obtained from the institution, the source must be credited when contributing to OSM.

In changeset tags: 

source=[Institution Name]
source:url=https://[original dataset URL]
license=KOGL Type 1; explicit permission obtained. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/[import wiki page]

Or on the OSM wiki import page: 

Data derived from [Institution Name], licensed under KOGL Type 1.
Explicit permission for ODbL redistribution obtained on [date]. See [link to permission document].
Integrated with OpenStreetMap under ODbL.

Additional Notes

  • Permission from an institution must always be preserved as a written record (email or official correspondence). Ideally, the institution's response should be kept as a screenshot or PDF.
  • Permission stated in official press releases or policy documents that specifically reference OSM contribution may also be acceptable, but the precise wording must be verified.
  • Data from local governments or privately contracted bodies may have unclear ownership; explicit confirmation of the copyright holder is always required.
  • Even if institution permission has been obtained, if the matter has not been reviewed by OSMF LWG, the OSM community may raise an objection and a data deletion decision could follow. It is strongly recommended to share the permission document with imports@openstreetmap.org or legal-talk@openstreetmap.org in advance to obtain a preliminary review.

Import Procedure for KOGL Data

information icon

This procedure applies to bulk and systematic imports. Ordinary manual editing — such as adding features based on personal field survey, or individually adding a small number of objects using one's own judgement with reference to a dataset — does not require the procedure below. However, licence review is always required regardless of scale. Even manually adding a single feature from a KOGL dataset constitutes a licence issue if that dataset is incompatible with ODbL.

The procedure set out in the Import/Guidelines must be followed in addition to — and independently of — any licence review. This procedure exists both to protect contributors themselves and to preserve the legal integrity of the OSM database; it cannot be omitted even where there is no issue with the licence.

Step Action Notes and Cautions
1 Identify KOGL type and conduct legal review Type 0 / expired works → proceed to Step 3. Type 1 → proceed to Step 2. Types 2, 3, 4 → cannot proceed without a comprehensive relicensing agreement from the institution.
2 Verify data provenance and third-party copyright Check whether the data was produced by a contractor; confirm whether the assignment of the right to create derivative works is included in the relevant contract. If unclear, request written confirmation from the institution.
3 Request OSM-specific permission from the institution Refer to the "Essential Elements of the Permission Request" section above. Use the Import/Getting permission template as a guide. Conduct by email or official correspondence.
4 Document the import plan on the OSM wiki Create a new page under Import/Catalogue. Must include: data source, basis for permission, data scope, conversion method, and conflict resolution approach.
5 Request community review (minimum 2 weeks) Post to imports@openstreetmap.org and the OSM community forum. Review and respond to any feedback raised.
6 Create a dedicated import account Use the format [institution/dataset]_import. Include a link to the wiki documentation page in the account profile. Must be separate from personal accounts.
7 Convert data to OSM schema and validate Follow OSM tagging conventions. Validate for duplicates and conflicts using tools such as JOSM Validator. Preserve existing OSM data in cases of conflict.
8 Conduct a small-scale pilot import Upload 1–5% of the total dataset or a limited geographic area first. Incorporate community feedback before proceeding with the full import.
9 Include mandatory changeset tags All changesets must include source, source:url, and license tags.
10 Execute the full import and monitor Proceed after community approval. Monitor DWG and community feedback for 1–2 weeks after completion.
11 Update the import catalogue Record the completion date, number of objects imported, key issues encountered, and resolutions in the Import/Catalogue page.
Warning
 If an import is carried out without following any of the steps above, the OSM Data Working Group (DWG) may classify it as a bad import and revert the contributed data in its entirety. Where licence issues are also involved, the contributing account may additionally be subject to editing restrictions. These are not punitive measures for bad faith — they are procedural actions taken to preserve the legal integrity of the OSM database, and good-faith imports are not exempt.

Summary Verdict by Type

KOGL Type / Situation Assessment Conditions and Notes
Type 0 / Expired public works yes Permitted All 11 import procedure steps must be followed. Third-party copyright must be independently verified.
Type 1 + explicit institutional permission covering ODbL redistribution maybe Conditionally permitted All elements in the permission letter must be satisfied. Permission document must be published on the OSM wiki. Prior review by OSMF LWG is strongly recommended.
Type 1 + no institutional permission no Not permitted Superficially close to requirements but prohibited due to: no explicit relicensing permission, attribution method conflict, and possibility of license condition changes.
Type 2 (Non-Commercial) no Incompatible Clearly incompatible with ODbL. Requires a comprehensive relicensing agreement (not merely a permission letter) from the institution before use is possible.
Type 3 (No Derivatives) no Incompatible Clearly incompatible with ODbL. Same as above.
Type 4 (Non-Commercial + No Derivatives) no Incompatible Most restrictive type. Violates all core ODbL principles. Use in OSM is effectively impossible without a full relicensing agreement.

Known Cases

The following is a list of cases in which open data from the Republic of Korea has been imported into OpenStreetMap or where such an import has been considered and discussed. Only cases that have been publicly discussed or documented are included; the actual number of cases may be higher.

See Also

Notes

  1. ↑ Moreover, the specific attribution requirements often differ between individual KOGL datasets.
  2. ↑ This includes emails that do not specifically address the terms of the permission being sought.
  3. ↑ Use of CC BY 4.0 licensed data in OpenStreetMap - OpenStreetMap Foundation Blog (2017-03-17)
  4. ↑ Licence/Licence Compatibility - OSMF Wiki
Retrieved from "https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Korea_Open_Government_License&oldid=3046312"