Licensing Working Group/Minutes/2020-08-13

From OpenStreetMap Foundation

OpenStreetMap Foundation, Licensing Working Group - Agenda & Minutes
Thursday August 13th 2020, 20:00 - 21:00 UTC


  • Simon Poole (chairing)
  • Kathleen Lu
  • Jim Vidano
  • Michael Cheng
  • Guillaume Rischard



Minutes by Dorothea.


Adoption of past Minutes

Previous Action Items

  • 2017-03-02 Simon to determine existing obligations towards sources listed on the copyright page.
  • 2017-05-04 All/Simon to review import guidelines wrt licence “approval”.
  • 2018-03-08 All look at the Working Groups collecting personal information.
  • 2018-04-12 LWG to follow-up on the iD editor, as the number of changesets is now included on the changeset comments thread.
  • 2018-05-10 Jim to sign the LWG NDA.
  • 2018-10-11 Simon to ask the board to contact the Working Groups about the NDA and ask people to sign up.
  • 2019-01-10 Simon to draft text to developers of apps related to geo/mapping, having OSM in their names or using variations of our logo.
  • 2019-02-14 Simon to summarise the advice regarding information requests from law enforcement and send it around.
  • 2019-12-12 Simon to discuss trademark registration strategy (more countries, additional classes, etc) with lawdit
  • 2019-12-12 Simon to get back to Uni Heidelberg wrt track issue
  • 2020-01-09 Simon to include text about downstream produced works to the FAQ.
  • 2020-01-09 Kathleen to produce 1-2 sentences about tile licence, to be included on copyright page.
  • 2020-03-12 Simon to send to Mateusz the link with the research by Kathleen on attribution on various apps.
  • 2020-03-12 Guillaume to talk to the board and get back to the LWG after the board's screen to screen meeting. Suggested feedback to include if the LWG should continue with the attribution guidance in some form as it is now.
  • 2020-04-09 Guillaume to contact Safer about OpenFricheMap.
  • 2020-05-14 Simon to create a spreadsheet of top level country domains with info about whether registered by OSMF or not.
  • 2020-06-11 Simon to send email to Moovit to follow-up.
  • 2019-08-13 Simon to email Queensland authorities about CC BY 4.0 Permission.
  • 2020-08-13 Guillaume to provide a red-lined version of the attribution guideline to LWG.
  • 2020-08-13 Guillaume to ask the board if they will share outside counsel on the attribution guideline with the LWG.



  • Action item done.
  • They got back to Guillaume, dropped the application.
  • Safer will work together with OSM-FR.

Moovit (Reportage)

  • They replied after a long time (we emailed them in March).
  • They committed to improve attribution in their app (attribution was ok on website) - will probably be visible in September release.
  • We have suggested to them to engage more with OSM and OSMF.


  • Domain overview as per action item
  • ™ clearing house

Indonesia - owned by group identifying as HOT Indonesia.

Not registered yet

  • Malaysia - might need presence in country. We have active people from HOT.
  • Pakistan - probably easy.
  • Ukraine - substantial user base.

  • We have reserved it.

  • Recently registered, probably by squatter.
  • We have emailed them but didn't respond.
  • Not worth spending time/money on it, unless there is a reason for confusion.

  • Unregistered at the moment.
  • Participant suggested registration by Facebook. Second suggestion of registration by OSMF and providing licence to Facebook or directing the domain to iD.

  • To be added to the list.

  • Registered as a test by Paul, needs to be transferred to OSMF.

  • NY has strong local community.
  • The person who registered was willing to give it, but it has to be someone in the U.S.
  • Guillaume has asked Maggie Cawley (OSM US), and was willing to be involved.

Domain purchase/registration

  • By Treasurer at the moment.

ICANN Clearing House

  • registration recently run out - renewed for 3 years.
  • allows registration during sunrise period (expensive).
    • if .map becomes available within the next 3 years, we'll have advance notification.
  • notifications for new top level domains and some old ones - not for most old country domains
  • few emails.
  • notice for renewal sent ~ 3 months before.


  • few emails from ICANN Clearing House (2-3 in last years).
  • trademark watch goes to legal@

Kathleen offered to monitor for any conflicts/reports.

Queensland CC BY 4.0 Permission

  • Historically Australia used CCBY for governmental geodata.
  • Had federal level allowing us to use data (before licence change) - CCBY 2.0
  • Currently need waivers for CCBY 2.0 data and older, which the Australian community has been obtaining.


  • Authorities do not provide waivers but state that their licence is compatible with ODbL.
  • They have talked to their legal counsel.
  • Local regulation does not allow them to give the waiver.

Different position between Simon and Kathleen regarding next steps:

  • Kathleen - they are aware of what ODbL entails and we can proceed.
  • Simon - prefers to communicate with them in person.


  • Administration may change - ensure to maintain long-term good relationships.
  • If their position is changed in the future, we would have to remove that data and other data built on top of it.

Suggestion: notify them that we will go ahead and distribute data under ODbL terms.

Sidenotes shared by Simon

  • Past meeting with CC representatives: Initial position of CC reps was that there was clear compatibility between CCBY and ODbL licences. Changed position when pointed out produced works, where any licence is allowed as long as attribution to source is given.
  • Switzerland: two separate cases where the government made databases available under CC0, even if they did not have the right to do so.

Action item: Simon to send email to Queensland authorities.

Handover Simon

  • Trademarks
  • Incoming inquiries to legal-questions
  • Law enforcement contact
  • ?

Incoming enquiries to legal-questions

  • Suggestion: Dorothea do a triage on incoming enquiries?
  • 20% require custom answer.

Law enforcement contact

  • Very few - false positives. One case has not even edited OSM.
  • Requires interfacing with the system administrators.

Jim logged off ~ 1 hour.


  • US proof of use
  • PH
  • Future contact person for outside counsel

Kathleen offered to take-up trademarks.


  • Recently received a request to send proof of use.
  • We had also registered for clothing and contacted us requiring specimens for caps - we might have to remove it.
  • Next proof of use in ~ 5 years.
  • Only registration not handled by Lawdit.


  • Trademark lapsed last year due to error.
  • Counsel in UK offered to cover the cost, as it was their fault.
  • Should be arriving soon.


  • Pending registration.

Some registrations failed as the terms were considered too generic/descriptive.


  • Historically using them as used to register EU trademark.
  • They suggested a call.
  • Kathleen suggested that Simon contacts Lawdit and have her cc'ed during next months.

Any other business

Attribution guideline feedback

  • Question about progress from board on providing red-lined version of board's version on attribution guideline.
  • Kathleen has provided comments but not done a full review, red-lined version needed.

Action item: Guillaume to provide a red-lined version of the attribution guideline to LWG.


  • Providing a single document that LWG members are all able to edit to consolidate LWG comments.
  • Forward to LWG any outside counsel to know at least some of the motivation.

Points mentioned during discussion

  • Input of outside counsel (pro-bono lawyer) received by the board after their version was drafted.
  • Rory and Guillaume had asked at the previous Advisory Board meeting whether AB Corporate Members could provide work done on analysing/interpreting ODbL.
    • Michael was not aware of any such work done by Facebook.
  • Every lawyer seems to provide a different interpretation of ODbL.
  • LWG trying to strike a balance between asserting a state of the world which we think to be true but other things disagree.
  • Retroactively we are bound by the guidance that we give.

Clarification asked on whether it was stated that the board cannot provide outside counsel to LWG because it might break privilege.

  • Decision to keep feedback board-only as it talks about weaknesses of ODbL.
  • Most feedback could be shared as it is not-controversial, but some is.
  • Potential issues pointed out are most likely already known by LWG. If there is something serious the LWG has not considered, it should be made aware of it.
  • Historically we have not made outside counsel public, as potentially problematic.

Counsel can be provided to LWG via email, does not have to be discussed in a meeting.

Opponent has agreed on a settlement.

Not minuted

Asked to not minute this topic.

Next Meeting

September 10th 2020 20:00 UTC on Mumble